Peter Funk wrote: > > ... > > I however often like the infix notation better. > That may be a matter of taste. Imagine we would have to write: > "%5d %20s %s\n".printf((num, name, adr)) > instead of > "%5d %20s %s\n" % (num, name, adr) > I'm happy, that this is not the case in todays Python. Either way it is infix (as opposed to prefix or postfix). The question is whether it is an infix *operator* or a method. I believe that the only thing aesthetically wrong with this: "%5d %20s %s\n".insert(num, name, adr) is that people are not "used" to seeing method invocations on literal strings. But then new Python programmers are not used to seeing people divide or mod strings either! And the nice thing about using a method name is that you can look method names up in the indexes of books easily and even guess the meaning of them from their English meanings. Symbols are (IMHO) best reserved for usages where their meanings are already set by real-world convention. (i.e. 5+3!) If some other language convinces millions of programmers that string division is natural then we could follow suit but I'd rather not lead the way. -- Take a recipe. Leave a recipe. Python Cookbook! http://www.ActiveState.com/pythoncookbook
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