On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 00:54:17 +1100 > Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> > wrote: > > > BTW, there's a subtlety here: ``%s`` currently means "insert the result > > > of calling __str__", but bytes formatting should *not* call __str__. > > > > Since it derives from the C printf notation, it means "insert string > > here". The fact that __str__ will be called is secondary to that. I > > would say it's not a problem for bytes formatting to call __bytes__, > > or in some other way convert to bytes without calling __str__. > > > > Will it be confusing to have bytes and str supporting distinctly > > different format operations? Might it be better to instead create a > > separate and very different method on a bytes, just to emphasize the > > difference? > > The people who want bytes formatting, AFAICT, want something that is > reasonably 2.x-compatible. That means using the same method / operator > and calling conventions. > Right, but that also doesn't mean that a library from the Cheeseshop couldn't be provided which works around any Python 2/3 differences. But my suspicion is anyone requesting this feature (e.g. Mercurial) want it implemented in C for performance and so some pure Python library to help with this won't get any traction.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
