On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Augie Fackler <r...@durin42.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> > wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > On 13 January 2014 23:57, Augie Fackler <r...@durin42.com> wrote: > >> >> 1) What do we need in terms of functionality > >> >> > >> >> Best guess, %s, %d, and %f. I've not done a full audit of the code, > but > >> >> some > >> >> limited looking over the grep hits for % in .py files suggests I'm > >> >> right, > >> >> and we could even do without %f (we only use that for 'hg --time' > >> >> output, > >> >> which we could do in unicode). > >> > > >> > I think PEP 460 will have you covered there, or hopefully asciistr on > >> > 3.3+ > >> > >> I'm confused on how PEP 460 would help -- Augie mentioned %d, which it > >> excludes. > > > > > > > > Yes - not having %d makes this much much less useful to me. > > > > For my part, it'd probably be fine if we could do %s (which would handle > an > > RHS that was bytes, and only bytes, no handing of str or __bytes__-type > > stuff at all) and %d (with all the usual format modifiers, and would > result > > in an ascii-compatible sequence of bytes all the time). > > Would it be okay of instead of %s you had to use %b for those > semantics? (%d would still exist) Probably, but it'd be quite painful, since we'd have to to some kind of .sub() call all over the place to remain compatible with 2.4 and 2.6. Dropping 2.4 might be possible in the 3.5 timeframe - 2.6 almost certainly not.
_______________________________________________ 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
