Re: Inconsistency in hex()

2005-07-14 Thread Steven D'Aprano 
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 20:57:54 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:

> Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>> hex(75)
>> '0x4b'
>> >>> hex(75*256**4)
>> '0x4BL'
>> 
>> By accident or design? Apart from the aesthetic value that lowercase hex
>> digits are ugly, should we care?
> 
> Use ('%x' % 75) or ('%X' % 75) if you care.


Ah! Now that's the sort of utterly obvious in hindsight thing that
wouldn't have occurred to me in a month of Sundays. That's why c.l.p is so
useful -- lots of people with lots of ways of doing things, all sharing.

Thanks Paul.

(Actually, I don't care at the moment, but when I do, I'll have a fix.)


-- 
Steven.

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Inconsistency in hex()

2005-07-13 Thread Paul Rubin 
Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> hex(75)
> '0x4b'
> >>> hex(75*256**4)
> '0x4BL'
> 
> By accident or design? Apart from the aesthetic value that lowercase hex
> digits are ugly, should we care?

Use ('%x' % 75) or ('%X' % 75) if you care.
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Inconsistency in hex()

2005-07-12 Thread Raymond Hettinger 
[Steven D'Aprano]
> > hex() of an int appears to return lowercase hex digits, and hex() of a
> > long uppercase.

[Terry Reedy]
> Already bug-reported and fixed for 2.5 (to use lowercase, I believe).
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=5470&atid=105470&func=detail&aid=1224347

Score another victory for the time machine ;-)


Raymond

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Inconsistency in hex()

2005-07-12 Thread Bengt Richter 
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:17:07 +1000, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>hex() of an int appears to return lowercase hex digits, and hex() of a
>long uppercase.
>
 hex(75)
>'0x4b'
 hex(75*256**4)
>'0x4BL'
>
>By accident or design? Apart from the aesthetic value that lowercase hex
>digits are ugly, should we care?
>
>It would also be nice if that trailing L would disappear.
>
 >>> '%010X'% 0x12345678
 '0012345678'
 >>> '%010X'% 75
 '4B'
 >>> '%010X'% (75*256**4)
 '4B'
 >>> '%010X'% (-75*256**4)
 '-4B'
 >>> '%010X'% (-75)
 '-0004B'

I've ranted about the lack of a natural format for showing
the hex of a canonical twos-complement representation of a negative number,
but I guess I'll let it go with this mention ;-)

BTW, yeah, I know it's not so hard to write
 >>> '%010X'% (-75 &0xff)
 'B5'
 >>> '%010X'% (-75*256**4 &0xff)
 'B5'
or a helper or a str subclass that does __mod__ differently but that's not with 
the batteries ;-/
Regards,
Bengt Richter
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Inconsistency in hex()

2005-07-12 Thread Terry Reedy 

"Steven D'Aprano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> hex() of an int appears to return lowercase hex digits, and hex() of a
> long uppercase.

Already bug-reported and fixed for 2.5 (to use lowercase, I believe).
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=5470&atid=105470&func=detail&aid=1224347
 



-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Inconsistency in hex()

2005-07-12 Thread Dan Bishop 
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> hex() of an int appears to return lowercase hex digits, and hex() of a
> long uppercase.
>
> >>> hex(75)
> '0x4b'
> >>> hex(75*256**4)
> '0x4BL'
>
> By accident or design? Apart from the aesthetic value that lowercase hex
> digits are ugly, should we care?
>
> It would also be nice if that trailing L would disappear.

Yes, but that can easily be worked around.

>>> def hex(x):
..."""Return the hexadecimal representation of an integer."""
...return __builtins__.hex(x).upper().rstrip('L')
...
>>> hex(75)
'0X4B'
>>> hex(75 * 256**4)
'0X4B'

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Inconsistency in hex()

2005-07-12 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED] 


Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> hex() of an int appears to return lowercase hex digits, and hex() of a
> long uppercase.
>
> >>> hex(75)
> '0x4b'
> >>> hex(75*256**4)
> '0x4BL'
>
> By accident or design? Apart from the aesthetic value that lowercase hex
> digits are ugly, should we care?

No, just use GMPY.

>>> from gmpy import *
>>> print digits(75,16)
0x4b
>>> print digits(75*256**4,16)
0x4b

Although it would have been nice to also get rid of the octal
hex prefix inconsistencies.

>>> for b in range(2,37):
print digits(75*256**4,b)

1001011
1010210110021101212101010
1023
20234201333002300
403551524040520
32162332321446
045400 <-- base 8 starts with leading 0
1123407355333
322122547200
11467a864463
5251a233140
244b718a01c
1183b2a2b96
85a4947a50
0x4b   <-- base 16 starts with leading 0x
2c304c17g7
1b42e32gac
ii6ie79hd
cbd35i800
8ahh6hjk6
5j31lfeje
42dma7a93
2m5e7gl80
22ja8i0d0
1e2je99kc
13lc7ana3
noclhnpk
ijflp0nb
elq24la0
blth91bl
9c00
7idw8no3
64hn2ago
5083wbdk
43zbg45c



>
> It would also be nice if that trailing L would disappear.
> 
> -- 
> Steven.

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Inconsistency in hex()

2005-07-12 Thread Steven D'Aprano 
hex() of an int appears to return lowercase hex digits, and hex() of a
long uppercase.

>>> hex(75)
'0x4b'
>>> hex(75*256**4)
'0x4BL'

By accident or design? Apart from the aesthetic value that lowercase hex
digits are ugly, should we care?

It would also be nice if that trailing L would disappear.

-- 
Steven.

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list