[issue2599] allow field_name in format strings to default to next positional argument (e.g., {})
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment: This was proposed on python-ideas, discussed, approved, and implemented for 2.7 and 3.1. Note that although this wasn't discussed, the internationalization issue is answered by the fact that when internationalizing, you are rewriting the string. At that time if you need a different order of the subsitutions you can specify it, so requiring non-default numbering in the original string doesn't really buy you anything for internationalization. -- nosy: +bitdancer resolution: - accepted stage: - committed/rejected status: open - closed versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.1 -Python 3.0 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue2599 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue2599] allow field_name in format strings to default to next positional argument (e.g., {})
Alexander Belopolsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Omitting the ordinals from {} format units will present a problem with
internationalization because the arguments may need to be rendered in
different order in different languages. This is a frequent problem with
the % formats and it is a good thing that the new format requires
explicit enumeration. If your argument list grows to the big enough
size that renumbering presents a problem, you should consider using
named rather than positional arguments.
This type of changes should be discussed on python-ideas list first.
--
nosy: +belopolsky
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2599
__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue2599] allow field_name in format strings to default to next positional argument (e.g., {})
New submission from Bruce Frederiksen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Being forced to number the arguments when using positional arguments in
a format string is difficult to maintain. Adding an argument to the
format string either requires renumbering all subsequent arguments, or
using an out of sequence number such that the order of the format()
arguments no longer matches the order of the {...} arguments. Making
the integer optional would solve this. Thus, {} would be like the old
%s where it was far easier to add %s arguments in the middle of the
format string.
Python 3.0a3
--
components: Interpreter Core
messages: 65210
nosy: dangyogi
severity: normal
status: open
title: allow field_name in format strings to default to next positional
argument (e.g., {})
type: feature request
versions: Python 3.0
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2599
__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
