On 2/12/2016 12:06 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:00 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com
<mailto:p.f.mo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I have no opinion on anything other than that whatever syntax is
implemented as long as it allows single underscores between digits,
such as
1_000_000
Everything else is irrelevant to me, and if I read code that uses
anything else, I'd judge it based on readability and style, and
wouldn't care about arguments that "it's allowed by the grammar".
I totally agree -- and it's clear that other cultures group digits
differently, so we should allow that, but while I'll live with it
either way, I'd rather have it be as restrictive as possible rather
than as unrestricted as possible. As in:
no double underscores
Useful for really long binary constants... one _ for nybble or field
divisions, two __ for byte divisions.
Of course, really long binary constants might be a bad idea.
no underscore right before or after a period
no underscore at the beginning or end.
You get your wish for the beginning... it would be ambiguous with
identifiers. And your style guide can include whatever restrictions you
like, for your code.
....
As Paul said, as long as I can do the above, I'll be fine, but I think
everyone's source code will be a lot cleaner in the long run if you
don't have the option of doing who knows what weird arrangement....
As for the SS# example -- it seems a bad idea to me to store a SS#
number as an integer anyway -- so all the weird IDs etc. formats
aren't really relevant...
SS#... why not integer? Phone#... why not integer? There's a lot of
nice digit-division conventions for phone#s in different parts of the world.
The only ambiguity is if such numbers have leading zeros, you have to
"know" (or record) how many total digits are expected.
_______________________________________________
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
