On 24 February 2012 22:20, wrote:
> I find the .format syntax too complicated and difficult to learn. It has
> so many bells and whistles, making it more than just a *mini* language.
> So for my own code, I always prefer % formatting for simplicity.
>
> +1
> Regards,
> Martin
>
___
Big +1
On Feb 26, 2012 4:41 PM, "Eli Bendersky" wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 12:20, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>
>> > I find that strange, especially for an expert Python dev. I, a newbie,
>> > find it far friendlier (and easier for a new programmer to grasp).
>> > Maybe it's because I use it
> Indeed, that note was written before we decided that getting rid of
> "%" formatting altogether would be a bad idea.
>
> It would be better to update it to say something like:
>
> "The formatting operations described here are modelled on C's printf()
> syntax. They only support formatting of cert
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 12:20, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> > I find that strange, especially for an expert Python dev. I, a newbie,
> > find it far friendlier (and easier for a new programmer to grasp).
> > Maybe it's because I use it all the time, and you don't?
>
> That is most likely the case.
On 25/02/2012 20:16, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 25/02/2012 13:13, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 25/02/2012 05:55, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Mark
Lawrence wrote:
Quoting the docs http://docs.python.org/py3k/library/stdtypes.html
4.6.2. Old String Formatting Operations
Not
On 25/02/2012 13:13, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 25/02/2012 05:55, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Mark
Lawrence wrote:
Quoting the docs http://docs.python.org/py3k/library/stdtypes.html
4.6.2. Old String Formatting Operations
Note
The formatting operations described here
On 25/02/2012 05:55, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
Quoting the docs http://docs.python.org/py3k/library/stdtypes.html
4.6.2. Old String Formatting Operations
Note
The formatting operations described here are obsolete and may go away in
future ve
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 12:20, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> I find that strange, especially for an expert Python dev. I, a newbie,
>> find it far friendlier (and easier for a new programmer to grasp).
>> Maybe it's because I use it all the time, and you don't?
>
> That is most likely the case. You
I don't feel "similar to other language" is not enough reason for
builtins violates the Zen.
Violating the Zen by standard library like `getopt` for compatibility to
other language or API is good.
So, I prefer moving %-style format from builtin str to function in string
module in Python 4.
On Sat
> I find that strange, especially for an expert Python dev. I, a newbie,
> find it far friendlier (and easier for a new programmer to grasp).
> Maybe it's because I use it all the time, and you don't?
That is most likely the case. You learn by practice. For that very
reason, the claim "and easier
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 05:10, Ned Batchelder wrote:
Has Python *ever* removed a feature except in X.0 releases?
I thought this happens all the time, but with deprecations first. Is
that not the case?
Hardly "all the time". Only when absolutely necessary, the ex
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 02:20, wrote:
> Zitat von Tshepang Lekhonkhobe :
>> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 23:39, "Martin v. Löwis"
>>> If that issue was getting serious, I would prefer if the .format method
>>> was deprecated, and only % formatting was kept.
>>
>> Why is that? Isn't .format regarded s
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 05:10, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> Has Python *ever* removed a feature except in X.0 releases?
I thought this happens all the time, but with deprecations first. Is
that not the case?
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:20 AM, wrote:
> I find the .format syntax too complicated and difficult to learn. It has
> so many bells and whistles, making it more than just a *mini* language.
> So for my own code, I always prefer % formatting for simplicity.
Heh, I've switched almost entirely to .
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>
> Quoting the docs http://docs.python.org/py3k/library/stdtypes.html
>
> 4.6.2. Old String Formatting Operations
>
> Note
>
> The formatting operations described here are obsolete and may go away in
> future versions of Python. Use the new
On 2/24/2012 7:23 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
I think this is daft because all of the code has to be supported for
the ten years that MVL has suggested. I suggest a plan that says
something like:-
Until Python 3.5 both methods of string formatting will be supported.
In Python 3.6 the the old for
On Feb 24, 2012 6:26 PM, "Mark Lawrence" wrote:
>
> On 24/02/2012 21:37, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>>>
>>> I was of the thought that Old String Formatting |"%s" % foo| was to be
>>> phased out by Advanced String Formatting |"{}.format(foo)|.
>>
>>
>> This is actually not the case, and never was. So
On 24/02/2012 21:37, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
I was of the thought that Old String Formatting |"%s" % foo| was to be
phased out by Advanced String Formatting |"{}.format(foo)|.
This is actually not the case, and never was. Some people would indeed
like to see that happen, and others are strongl
Zitat von Tshepang Lekhonkhobe :
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 23:39, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
It is a burden for some people to learn and remember the exact details
of both systems and exactly how they differ. Having both in the stdlib
hurts readability for such people. I would prefer that the std
On Feb 24, 2012, at 10:39 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> It is a burden for some people to learn and remember the exact details
>> of both systems and exactly how they differ. Having both in the stdlib
>> hurts readability for such people. I would prefer that the stdlib only
>> used {} formatting o
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 23:39, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>>> It is a burden for some people to learn and remember the exact details
>>> of both systems and exactly how they differ. Having both in the stdlib
>>> hurts readability for su
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 23:39, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> It is a burden for some people to learn and remember the exact details
>> of both systems and exactly how they differ. Having both in the stdlib
>> hurts readability for such people. I would prefer that the stdlib only
>> used {} formattin
> I was of the thought that Old String Formatting |"%s" % foo| was to be
> phased out by Advanced String Formatting |"{}.format(foo)|.
This is actually not the case, and never was. Some people would indeed
like to see that happen, and others are strongly opposed.
As a consequence, both APIs for f
> It is a burden for some people to learn and remember the exact details
> of both systems and exactly how they differ. Having both in the stdlib
> hurts readability for such people. I would prefer that the stdlib only
> used {} formatting or if not that, that it only used the simple,
> hard-to-for
On 2/24/2012 11:41 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2012/2/24 Tshepang Lekhonkhobe:
Hi,
I was of the thought that Old String Formatting |"%s" % foo| was to be
phased out by Advanced String Formatting |"{}.format(foo)|. I however
keep seeing new code committed into the main VCS using the old style.
Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
Hi,
I was of the thought that Old String Formatting |"%s" % foo| was to be
phased out by Advanced String Formatting |"{}.format(foo)|. I however
keep seeing new code committed into the main VCS using the old style.
Is this okay? Is there a policy? I ask also because I
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:41 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2012/2/24 Tshepang Lekhonkhobe :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was of the thought that Old String Formatting |"%s" % foo| was to be
>> phased out by Advanced String Formatting |"{}.format(foo)|. I however
>> keep seeing new code committed into the main
2012/2/24 Tshepang Lekhonkhobe :
> Hi,
>
> I was of the thought that Old String Formatting |"%s" % foo| was to be
> phased out by Advanced String Formatting |"{}.format(foo)|. I however
> keep seeing new code committed into the main VCS using the old style.
> Is this okay? Is there a policy? I ask
Hi,
I was of the thought that Old String Formatting |"%s" % foo| was to be
phased out by Advanced String Formatting |"{}.format(foo)|. I however
keep seeing new code committed into the main VCS using the old style.
Is this okay? Is there a policy? I ask also because I expect CPython
to lead by exa
29 matches
Mail list logo
