On Tue, Jan 7, 2014, at 12:46 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Jan 07, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
>
> >Very nice, thanks. If I was to make a blasphemous suggestion I would
> >even target it for Python 3.4. (No, seriously, this is a big issue
> >- see the recent discussion by Armin - and the big names involved show
> >that it is a major holdup of 3.x uptake.) It would of course depend
> >a lot on how much code from unicode formatting can be retained or
> >adapted as opposed to a rewrite from scratch.
>
> I think we should be willing to entertain breaking feature freeze for
> getting
> this in Python 3.4. It's a serious enough problem, and Python 3.4 will
> be
> fairly widely distributed. For example, it will be a supported version
> in the
> next Debian release and in Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, and *possibly* the default
> Python
> 3 version. However, I think we'd need to see how disruptive the code
> changes
> are first, and get good review of any proposed patches. Larry and Guido
> would
> have to be on board with the exemption as well.
I agree. This is a very important, much-requested feature for low-level
networking code.
>
> If adopted for Python 3.4, PEP 460 should be modest in its goals, but I
> think
> I'd still like to see the following excluded and unknown features added:
>
> * Attribute access: {obj.attr}
> * Indexing: {dict[key]}
> * format keywords? b'{arg}'.format(arg=5)
> * str % dict ? b'%(arg)s' % {'arg': 5)
Yes, I don't think we need to support very much of the formatting
language cover 99.8% of formating cases for bytes.
_______________________________________________
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
