RetroSearch Browse

Fri Jan 10 23:42:18 CET 2014 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/131166.html

On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:33:57 -0500
"Eric V. Smith" <eric at trueblade.com> wrote:
> On 1/10/2014 5:29 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:56:19 -0500
> > "Eric V. Smith" <eric at trueblade.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I agree. I don't see any reason to exclude int and float. See Guido's
> >> messages http://bugs.python.org/issue3982#msg180423 and
> >> http://bugs.python.org/issue3982#msg180430 for some justification and
> >> discussion.
> > 
> > If you are representing int and float, you're really formatting a text
> > message, not bytes. Basically if you allow the formatting of int and
> > float instances, there's no reason not to allow the formatting of
> > arbitrary objects through __str__. It doesn't make sense to
> > special-case those two types and nothing else.
> 
> It might not for .format(), but I'm not convinced. But for %-formatting,
> str is already special-cased for these types.

That's not what I'm saying. str.__mod__ is able to represent all kinds
of types through %s and calling __str__. It doesn't make sense for
bytes.__mod__ to only support int and float. Why only them?

Regards

Antoine.

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

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/131166.html below:

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