On 12/12/2011 10:56 PM, Ben Wolfson wrote: > Hi, > > I'm hoping to get some kind of consensus about the divergences between > the implementation and documentation of str.format > (http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-June/111860.html and > the linked bug report contain examples of the divergences). These > pertain to the arg_name, attribute_name, and element_index fields of > the grammar in the docs: > > replacement_field ::= "{" [field_name] ["!" conversion] [":" > format_spec] "}" > field_name ::= arg_name ("." attribute_name | "[" > element_index "]")* > arg_name ::= [identifier | integer] > attribute_name ::= identifier > element_index ::= integer | index_string > index_string ::= <any source character except "]"> + > > Nothing definitive emerged from the last round of discussion, and as > far as I can recall there are now three proposals for what kind of > changes might be worth making: > > (1) the implementation should conform to the docs;* > (2) like (1) with the change that element_index should be changed to > "integer | identifier" (rendering index_string otiose);
I've now learned what "otiose" means. Thanks! > (3) like (1) with the change that index_string should be changed to > '<any source character except "]", "}", or "{">'. This is still on my plate. I just haven't had a lot of Python time recently. But I do plan to address this. Eric. _______________________________________________ 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