On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 09:01:29 -0600 "Karl O. Pinc" <k...@karlpinc.com> wrote:
> I guess I will advocate for _some_ specification built into Python's > definition. Otherwise everybody should _always_ build their own > formatter; lest they wake up one morning and find that int zero prints > as "+0". Having made a suggestion I've followed up with a pull request. https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/18111 I think I have come up with a very minimal and sane set of restrictions on the default Numeric string representations. Having done that, I'm less interested in spending a lot more time on this. I'd be happy to explain my wording choices, and equally happy to have the pull request immediately rejected. The pull request is presently failing the check for news. (I'm not entirely clear on how to satisfy the requirement, or whether I could come up with a good news entry. I'll wait to resolve this if it looks like the patch is going anywhere.) There should probably also be unit tests. But again, I'll wait to see if this is going anywhere. FYI, it was remarkably easy to build the docs. But the contribution process goes through an annoying number of corporations (github, the contributor signature...) and login steps. (The contributor signature needs to clear at your end.) Regards, Karl <k...@karlpinc.com> Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward." -- Robert A. Heinlein _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/FDC772QSZB5IE7TY4DQILHWBZS2WYKKQ/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
