On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 3:52 AM, Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Chris Angelico wrote: > [...] >> For the record, there's nothing at all wrong with printf-style >> formatting; its flexibility and brevity make it extremely useful in >> many situations. > > Except that it's old, not elegant, error prone, feature poor, and not > Pythonic!
[citation needed] > But besides all _that_ (and possibly more) it's slightly amusing, i suppose. > > Cling to the past much? > > What's wrong Chris, is the syntax of the new format method too difficult for > you? Or do you have a personal disliking for anything OOP? What does "OOP" mean, exactly? Operators aren't, methods are? > Personally, i would suggest the OP should learn the new Python formatting > methods and disregard the legacy printf style crap that has been copy/pasted > from countless other languages. > And that's the exact same FUD. Thank you for proving that a known troll supports the FUD, which is a strong indication that it should be ignored. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list