"Martin v. Loewis" wrote: > >... > > In the applications that I have in mind, interpolated strings are > typically presented to the user, so there must be a way to localize > them. An extension to the language that does not support localization > is useless if I have to find some other means for l10n. You will use another invocation syntax, but probably the same string interpolation syntax. > If there will be a standard library function that does the > interpolation anyway, I'd prefer not to have a language extension ot > achieve the same thing, but is more limited. If anything, the language > extension should be more powerful, not more limited, in applicability. The language extension should be syntactically simpler because it is what is used for simpler cases. Simpler constructs are also less likely to open up security issues. Paul Prescod
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4