On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 20:25 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On 1/17/06, Bob Ippolito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There shouldn't be a %B for the same reason there isn't an %O or %D > > -- they're all just digits, so there's not a need for an uppercase [...]
so %b is "binary", +1 > > The difference between hex() and oct() and the proposed binary() is > > I'd propose bin() to stay in line with the short abbreviated names. [...] +1 > The binary type should have a 0b prefix. [...] +1 For those who argue "who would ever use it?", I would :-) Note that this does not support and is independent of supporting arbitrary bases. I don't think we need to support arbitrary bases, but if we did I would vote for ".precision" to mean ".base" for "%d"... ie; "%3.3d" % 5 == " 12" I think supporting arbitrary bases for floats is way overkill and not worth considering. -- Donovan Baarda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://minkirri.apana.org.au/~abo/ _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
