Re: % vs {} string formatting for public APIs

2016-02-22 Thread James Bennett 
The only argument I see for format() over the % operator is that bytes
objects explicitly do not have the format() method and so it'll catch
errors where a bytes object is passed to something expecting a string.

But since we're already Unicode-ifying everything at the boundaries and
have been since before Python 3 existed, I don't think there's much gain
from that, and it's not like %-formatting is going away. So I'd argue that
it's fine to keep things as they are for now, use format() in future
commits if it's cleaner, or just adopt a policy of "if you're in there
making a change and it won't break back compat, feel free to update to
format() while you're at it" for people doing patches, rather than try to
force all usage to convert in one go.

On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Claude Paroz  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I don't see much gain with that change, except for specific cases. This
> would also bring a bunch of compatibility issues. I'd rather make the
> change when it does bring something. I understand your consistency
> argument, but we need to balance that with the work generated by the change
> in all existin projects. A -0 from me.
>
> Claude
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/5c9a0cfa-d618-470e-9530-522b0466d6f8%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAL13Cg9Rq8yz095k_qkrb7exy5EbRj%3DsD09cqi6T8%3DNTT6nd4w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: % vs {} string formatting for public APIs

2016-02-22 Thread Claude Paroz 
Hello,

I don't see much gain with that change, except for specific cases. This 
would also bring a bunch of compatibility issues. I'd rather make the 
change when it does bring something. I understand your consistency 
argument, but we need to balance that with the work generated by the change 
in all existin projects. A -0 from me.

Claude

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/5c9a0cfa-d618-470e-9530-522b0466d6f8%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: % vs {} string formatting for public APIs

2016-02-22 Thread Tim Graham 
As Claude noted in the ticket for the success_url change:

"I think that using the old percent-based interpolation method in 
get_success_url was not very wise, considering that % is a common escape 
marker in URLs. I'd suggest using the new format interpolation method to 
elude conflicts with escaping percent characters in URLs."
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/24133

I guess I don't see much downside to making the change as you suggested 
except that it could be quite tedious for large projects to adapt.

On Thursday, February 18, 2016 at 12:30:35 AM UTC-5, Jon Dufresne wrote:
>
> Hi, 
>
> I noticed that some Django public APIs use the % old-style string 
> formatting while others use the {} new-style formatting. 
>
> For example: 
>
> {} style 
>
> * success_url [0] (Converted to {} in 1.8) 
> * format_html [1] 
>
> % style 
>
> * ValidationError [2] 
> * related_name [3] 
>
>
> Is this difference intentional? 
>
> As success_url recently moved to {}, I'm guessing {} is Django's 
> preferred style? 
>
> If this different is not intentional, I would like to propose a change 
> to ValidationError to use the {} style formatting. This change would 
> go through the same deprecation path as used by success_url. Thoughts? 
>
> I think this would create a greater API consistency throughout the 
> framework. I think using a single, consistent string formatting API 
> follows the design philosophy "principle of least surprise". 
>
> Ultimately, I don't care what format is preferred, but I think one 
> should be used consistently. 
>
> I have created a proof of concept as to what this would mean as a 
> change. The change still requires new tests and docs; so it still WIP. 
>
>
> https://github.com/django/django/compare/master...jdufresne:remove-percent-placeholder
>  
>
> If there is support for this change, I would like to follow through a 
> ticket and finished PR. 
>
> Cheers, 
> Jon 
>
>
> [0] 
> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/ref/class-based-views/mixins-editing/#django.views.generic.edit.ModelFormMixin.success_url
>  
> [1] 
> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/ref/utils/#django.utils.html.format_html
>  
> [2] 
> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/ref/forms/validation/#raising-validationerror
>  
> [3] 
> https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/topics/db/models/#be-careful-with-related-name
>  
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/6147f047-403c-4036-a0f4-3e550b01c452%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

% vs {} string formatting for public APIs

2016-02-17 Thread Jon Dufresne 
Hi,

I noticed that some Django public APIs use the % old-style string
formatting while others use the {} new-style formatting.

For example:

{} style

* success_url [0] (Converted to {} in 1.8)
* format_html [1]

% style

* ValidationError [2]
* related_name [3]


Is this difference intentional?

As success_url recently moved to {}, I'm guessing {} is Django's
preferred style?

If this different is not intentional, I would like to propose a change
to ValidationError to use the {} style formatting. This change would
go through the same deprecation path as used by success_url. Thoughts?

I think this would create a greater API consistency throughout the
framework. I think using a single, consistent string formatting API
follows the design philosophy "principle of least surprise".

Ultimately, I don't care what format is preferred, but I think one
should be used consistently.

I have created a proof of concept as to what this would mean as a
change. The change still requires new tests and docs; so it still WIP.

https://github.com/django/django/compare/master...jdufresne:remove-percent-placeholder

If there is support for this change, I would like to follow through a
ticket and finished PR.

Cheers,
Jon


[0] 
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/ref/class-based-views/mixins-editing/#django.views.generic.edit.ModelFormMixin.success_url
[1] 
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/ref/utils/#django.utils.html.format_html
[2] 
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/ref/forms/validation/#raising-validationerror
[3] 
https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.9/topics/db/models/#be-careful-with-related-name

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CADhq2b6RCWUhHFAAKsKeYbgpA35TQ%3DoQrHyR5vFL8UmTHn3QAQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.