> (people who do interpolation tend to expect dynamic lexical scoping, not
> static
> object binding...)
After thinking a bit about it, you are right. Or more precisely, "inline"
interpolation with literals is mainly useful for quick-and-dirty scripts
rather than full-blown apps.
(this "quick-an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Dec 6, 2006, at 7:04 AM, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> btw, note that you can get the same behaviour with today's Python:
>
> s = I("some string here with ", variable, " in it")
>
Or even
s = I('some string here with $variable in it')
or some day
Antoine wrote:
> s = i"some string here with {variable} in it"
>
> The Interpolation object captures the format string, as well as a dict of
> the needed variables from the current locals and globals (here, the
> "variable").
I'm not sure I can think of a way to explain to a new Python programmer
> Or perhaps simpler, a new kind of string literal would construct an
> Interpolation object:
Hmm, so Jan proposed something similar in the meantime. Sorry for the noise.
___
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mail
> On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
> and "%" is overloadable on the basis that the return type is determined
> to be compatible with "some_type_that_signals_sql_interpolation". Those
> are some mighty big "IF"s though, and you could still concoct cases
> where things would break :-)
Or perha
