On 01/06/2014 09:50 AM, Xavier Morel wrote:
> On 2014-01-06, at 14:44 , Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
>>> Then,
>>> the following points must be decided to define the complete list of
>>> supported features (formatters):
>>>
>>> * Format integer to hexadecimal? ``%x`` and ``%X``
>>> * Format integer to octal? ``%o``
>>> * Format integer to binary? ``{!b}``
>>> * Alignment?
>>> * Truncating? Truncate or raise an error?
>>
>> Not desirable IMHO. bytes formatting should serve mainly for templating
>> situations (i.e. catenate and insert bytestrings into one another). We
>> cannot start giving text-like semantics to bytes objects without
>> confusing non-experts.
>
> But having at least some of struct's formatting options available on
> bytes.format or bytes % would be useful.
Perhaps, but the PEP's stated goal is to make porting between 2.x and
3.5 easier. Add struct formatting to 3.5 wouldn't help.
Eric.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
