Julien Palard <julien+pyt...@palard.fr> added the comment:
So, for newcomers finding this via "easy issues", go for it, you can fix this one :) On the different subjects discussed: # Mass-edit the stdlib We all agree that we should not mass-edit stdlib, (yet upgrading %-formatting to a newer syntax when modifying the same line may sometimes be a good idea). # Mass-edit the doc Having an f-string only doc is not possible, as Raymond mentionned (i18n, logging, templating), and not desirable: we need to document all existing formatting syntax. But the question is less "should we move everything to f-strings" than "should we move most examples out of %-formatting". # Let's not encourage %-formatting As we introduced str.format to fix issues from %-formatting [1] and allow extending formatting [2], we should not encourage newcomers to %-format strings. Good news: in the tutorial there's a *single* occurence of %-formatting in a paragraph named "Old string formatting"! There's probably a bunch of other places where upgrading the syntax in the doc would be a good idea, let's do it as we see them, when we feel it should obviously be upgraded, it also make nice easy issues, exactly as Mariatta did with this one (thanks Mariatta!). [1]: %-formatting a single value that may or may not be a tuple. [2]: allowing to format everything thrue __format__, not just the hardcoded list of type recognized by %-formatting. ---------- nosy: +mdk _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue38351> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
