+1 On 6/6/08, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nick Coghlan wrote: >> Greg Ewing wrote: >>> Nick Coghlan wrote: >>> >>>> - remove support for passing a single value to a format string >>>> without wrapping it in an iterable first >>> >>> But won't that clobber a large number of the simple >>> use cases that you want to keep %-formatting for? >> >> Note the part of the proposal that allows *any* iterable on the right >> hand side rather than the current insistence on a tuple. So the >> single-value use cases can be boxed easily with a list. >> >> To my mind salvaging %-formatting requires removing the ambiguity over >> whether or not the right hand side will be iterated over. >> > But then this breaks code where iterables are intended to be output > using a single %s format specifier, for example. I don't see why this > would be regarded as helpful. To avoid breakage I'd rather keep the > %-formatting ability as it is, and label it a legacy feature, rather > than "salvaging" it. It's going to be too tricky to convert using 2to3 > otherwise. > > regards > Steve > -- > Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 > Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org >
-- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
