Actually, I had ignored this discussion for so long that I was surprised by the outcome. My main use case isn't printing a number that may already be a string (I understand why that isn't reasonable when the output is expected to be bytes); it's printing a usually numeric value that may sometimes be None. It's a little surprising to have to use %a for this, but I guess I can live with it.
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > On 03/27/2014 04:42 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > >> >> I also seem to recall Guido saying he liked it [%a], which flipped the >> >> discussion from "do we have a good rationale for including it?" to "do >> we have a good rationale for the BDFL to ignore his instincts?". >> However, it would be up to Guido to confirm that recollection, and if >> "Guido likes it" is part of the reason for inclusion of the %a code, >> the PEP should mention that explicitly. >> > > I checked Guido's posts (Subject contains PEP 461, From contains guido) > and did not see anything to that effect. > > -- > ~Ethan~ > > _______________________________________________ > 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/ > guido%40python.org > -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________ 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
