guido wrote: > > > We don't care about anything except for %d, %s, possibly %c and = %x. > >=20 > > how about: >=20 > I would suggest to build this into PyErr_Format, which is what > everybody already uses. Instant safety. Need some more analysis of > what format codes are actually used greg's original mail mentioned %d, %i, %s, %c and %x, which is what I implemented. (if my code stumbles upon any other formatting code, it simply copies the rest of the formatting string to the output = string.) it also looks as if PyErr_Format is undocumented, so we could solve this by simply writing some documentation ;-) > and support for %.200s which is currently used often. note that the code intentionally ignores the .200 part; as greg pointed out, they're only used today to make sure the message doesn't overflow PyErr_Format's buffer... but it's easy to fix. patch coming. </F>
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