Am 28.01.23 um 00:41 schrieb Chris Angelico:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 at 10:08, Rob Cliffe via Python-list
<python-list@python.org> wrote:
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!
I appreciate the points you are making, Chris, but I am a bit taken
aback by such forceful language.
The exact same points have already been made, but not listened to.
Sometimes, forceful language is required in order to get people to
listen.
An arrogant bully's rationale. Personally, I'm fine with it. I've been
to Usenet for a long time, in which this way of "educating" people was
considered normal. But I do think it creates a deterring, toxic
environment and reflects back to you as a person negatively.
Addressing your points specifically:
1) I believe the quote character limitation could be overcome. It
would need a fair amount of work, for which I haven't (yet) the time or
inclination.
No problem. Here, solve it for this string:
eval_me = ' f"""{f\'\'\'{f"{f\'{1+2}\'}"}\'\'\'}""" '
F-strings can be nested, remember.
Exactly. This is precisely what I want to avoid. Essentially, proper
quotation of such a string requires to write a fully fledged f-string
parser, in which case the whole problem solves itself.
Don't ask how to use X to do Y. Ask how to do Y.
Good advice.
Exactly. As I have shown, asking how to use f-strings to achieve this
is simply not suitable, and there's no useful way to discuss other
than to argue semantics. If we had a GOAL to discuss, we could find
much better options.
I was not asking how to use f-strings. I was asking to evaluate a string
*as if it were* an f-string. Those are two completely different things
which you entirely ignored.
In other words, if there were a magic function:
evalfstring(s, x = x)
That would have been the ideal answer. There does not seem to be one,
however. So I'm back to silly workarounds.
Cheers,
Johannes
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
