RetroSearch Browse

Tue Jan 7 19:57:44 CET 2014 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/130978.html

On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 09:26:20PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Is this really a good idea?  PEP 460 proposes rather different
> semantics for bytes.format and the bytes % operator from the str
> versions.  I think this is going to be both confusing and a continuous
> target for "further improvement" until the two implementations
> converge.
>

Reading about the proposed differences reminded me of how in older python2
versions unicode() took keyword arguments but str.decode() only took
positional arguments.  I squashed a lot of trivial bugs in people's code
where that difference wasn't anticpated.  In later python2 versions both of
those came to understand how to take their arguments as keywords which saved
me from further unnecessary pain.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140107/5d24cbf4/attachment.sig>

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/130978.html below:

[Python-Dev] RFC: PEP 460: Add bytes % args and bytes.format(args) to Python 3.5