Min RK <benjami...@gmail.com> added the comment: In the A/B vote, I cast mine for B, for what it is worth, but it is not strongly held.
>From the IPython side, I don't view our particular issue as a major regression >for users. The only affected case for us is interactively typed string >literals in single statement cells not displaying themselves as results. Since >the same string is necessarily already displayed in the input, this isn't a >huge deal. This is pretty rare (maybe folks do this while investigating >unicode issues?) and we can handle it by recompiling empty modules with >'single' instead of the usual 'exec' that we use because most IPython inputs >are multi-statement cells coming from things like notebooks. It's relevant to >note that *any* logic in the cell, e.g. `"%i" % 1` or additional statements >have no issues. The proposed 'muliline' or 'interactive' compile mode would suit IPython very well, since that's what we really want - single * N, not actually a module, and this is illustrated by the way we do execution: compile with exec, then iterate through module.body and run the nodes one at a time. ---------- nosy: +minrk _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue32911> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
