On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 12:10 PM Wes Turner <wes.tur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Regex uses the ? symbol to indicate that something is a "non-greedy" match
> (to default to "shortest match")
>
exactly -- Regex was designed to be a parsing language, format specifiers
were not.
I'm quite surprised by how little the parse package has had to adapt the
format language to a parsing language, but it has indeed adapted it. I'm
honestly not sure how confusing that would be to have a built in parsing
language that looks like the format one, but behaves differently. I suspect
it's particularly an issue if we did assigning to fstrings, and less so if
it were a string method or stand alone function.
Trying parse with my earlier example in this thread:
In [1]: x, y, z = 23, 45, 67
In [2]: a_string = f"{x}{y}{z}"
In [3]: a_string
Out[3]: '234567'
In [4]: from parse import parse
In [5]: parse("{x}{y}{z}", a_string)
Out[5]: <Result () {'x': '2', 'y': '3', 'z': '4567'}>
In [6]: parse("{x:d}{y:d}{z:d}", a_string)
Out[6]: <Result () {'x': 2345, 'y': 6, 'z': 7}>
So that's interesting -- different level of "greadiness" for strings than
integers
In [7]: parse("{x:2d}{y:2d}{z:2d}", a_string)
Out[7]: <Result () {'x': 23, 'y': 45, 'z': 67}>
And now we get back what we started with -- not bad.
I'm liking this -- I think it would be good to have parse, or something
like in, in the stdlib, maybe as a string method.
Then maybe consider some auto-assigning behavior -- though I'm pretty
sceptical of that, and Wes' point about debugging is a good one. It would
create a real debugging / testing nightmare to have stuff auto-assigned
into locals.
-CHB
> import re
> str_ = "a:b:c"
> assert re.match(r'(.*):(.*)', str_).groups() == ("a:b", "c")
> assert re.match(r'(.*?):(.*)', str_).groups() == ("a", "b:c")
>
> Typically, debugging parsing issues involves testing the output of a
> function (not changes to locals()).
>
> Parse defaults to (case-insensitive) non-greedy/shortest-match:
>
> > parse() will always match the shortest text necessary (from left to
> right) to fulfil the parse pattern, so for example:
>
> > >>> pattern = '{dir1}/{dir2}'
> > >>> data = 'root/parent/subdir'
> > >>> sorted(parse(pattern, data).named.items())
> > [('dir1', 'root'), ('dir2', 'parent/subdir')]
>
> > So, even though {'dir1': 'root/parent', 'dir2': 'subdir'} would also fit
> the pattern, the actual match represents the shortest successful match for
> dir1.
>
> https://github.com/r1chardj0n3s/parse#potential-gotchas
>
> https://github.com/r1chardj0n3s/parse#format-specification :
>
> > Note: attempting to match too many datetime fields in a single parse()
> will currently result in a resource allocation issue. A TooManyFields
> exception will be raised in this instance. The current limit is about 15.
> It is hoped that this limit will be removed one day.
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2020, 1:00 PM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas <
> python-ideas@python.org> wrote:
>
>> Parsing can be ambiguous:
>> f"{x}:{y}" = "a:b:c"
>> Does this set
>> x = "a"
>> y = "b:c"
>> or
>> x = "a:b"
>> y = "c"
>> Rob Cliffe
>>
>> On 17/09/2020 05:52, Dennis Sweeney wrote:
>> > TL;DR: I propose the following behavior:
>> >
>> > >>> s = "She turned me into a newt."
>> > >>> f"She turned me into a {animal}." = s
>> > >>> animal
>> > 'newt'
>> >
>> > >>> f"A {animal}?" = s
>> > Traceback (most recent call last):
>> > File "<pyshell#2>", line 1, in <module>
>> > f"A {animal}?" = s
>> > ValueError: f-string assignment target does not match 'She turned
>> me into a newt.'
>> >
>> > >>> f"{hh:d}:{mm:d}:{ss:d}" = "11:59:59"
>> > >>> hh, mm, ss
>> > (11, 59, 59)
>> >
>> > === Rationale ===
>> >
>> > Part of the reason I like f-strings so much is that they reduce the
>> > cognitive overhead of reading code: they allow you to see *what* is
>> > being inserted into a string in a way that also effortlessly shows
>> > *where* in the string the value is being inserted. There is no need to
>> > "paint-by-numbers" and remember which variable is {0} and which is {1}
>> > in an unnecessary extra layer of indirection. F-strings allow string
>> > formatting that is not only intelligible, but *locally* intelligible.
>> >
>> > What I propose is the inverse feature, where you can assign a string
>> > to an f-string, and the interpreter will maintain an invariant kept
>> > in many other cases:
>> >
>> > >>> a[n] = 17
>> > >>> a[n] == 17
>> > True
>> >
>> > >>> obj.x = "foo"
>> > >>> obj.x == "foo"
>> > True
>> >
>> > # Proposed:
>> > >>> f"It is {hh}:{mm} {am_or_pm}" = "It is 11:45 PM"
>> > >>> f"It is {hh}:{mm} {am_or_pm}" == "It is 11:45 PM"
>> > True
>> > >>> hh
>> > '11'
>> >
>> > This could be thought of as analogous to the c language's scanf
>> > function, something I've always felt was just slightly lacking in
>> > Python. I think such a feature would more clearly allow readers of
>> > Python code to answer the question "What kinds of strings are allowed
>> > here?". It would add certainty to programs that accept strings,
>> > confirming early that the data you have is the data you want.
>> > The code reads like a specification that beginners can understand in
>> > a blink.
>> >
>> >
>> > === Existing way of achieving this ===
>> >
>> > As of now, you could achieve the behavior with regular expressions:
>> >
>> > >>> import re
>> > >>> pattern = re.compile(r'It is (.+):(.+) (.+)')
>> > >>> match = pattern.fullmatch("It is 11:45 PM")
>> > >>> hh, mm, am_or_pm = match.groups()
>> > >>> hh
>> > '11'
>> >
>> > But this suffers from the same paint-by-numbers, extra-indirection
>> > issue that old-style string formatting runs into, an issue that
>> > f-strings improve upon.
>> >
>> > You could also do a strange mishmash of built-in str operations, like
>> >
>> > >>> s = "It is 11:45 PM"
>> > >>> empty, rest = s.split("It is ")
>> > >>> assert empty == ""
>> > >>> hh, rest = rest.split(":")
>> > >>> mm, am_or_pm = s.split(" ")
>> > >>> hh
>> > '11'
>> >
>> > But this is 5 different lines to express one simple idea.
>> > How many different times have you written a micro-parser like this?
>> >
>> >
>> > === Specification (open to bikeshedding) ===
>> >
>> > In general, the goal would be to pursue the assignment-becomes-equal
>> > invariant above. By default, assignment targets within f-strings would
>> > be matched as strings. However, adding in a format specifier would
>> > allow the matches to be evaluated as different data types, e.g.
>> > f'{foo:d}' = "1" would make foo become the integer 1. If a more complex
>> > format specifier was added that did not match anything that the
>> > f-string could produce as an expression, then we'd still raise a
>> > ValueError:
>> >
>> > >>> f"{x:.02f}" = "0.12345"
>> > Traceback (most recent call last):
>> > File "<pyshell#2>", line 1, in <module>
>> > f"{x:.02f}" = "0.12345"
>> > ValueError: f-string assignment target does not match '0.12345'
>> >
>> > If we're feeling adventurous, one could turn the !r repr flag in a
>> > match into an eval() of the matched string.
>> >
>> > The f-string would match with the same eager semantics as regular
>> > expressions, backtracking when a match is not made on the first
>> > attempt.
>> >
>> > Let me know what you think!
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
>> > To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
>> > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
>> > Message archived at
>> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/JEGSKODAK5MCO2HHUF4555JZPZ6SKNEC/
>> > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
>> Message archived at
>> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/CVPRH5MEEUV2HPP4QOSZQDGQ6CWAXCY7/
>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/HFNRY3HB4CJXPKOX6ZXBPZ7V2TZ3O4FY/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
Christopher Barker, PhD
Python Language Consulting
- Teaching
- Scientific Software Development
- Desktop GUI and Web Development
- wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/BUZPGEC4EESBBVBAIV5G4RJ7SUED4XCX/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
