> Ka-Ping Yee wrote: > > > > Sorry i'm being forgetful -- could someone please refresh my memory: > > > > Was there a good reason for allowing both lowercase and capital 'r' > > as a prefix for raw-strings? I assume that the availability of both > > r'' and R'' is what led to having both u'' and U''. > > Right. > > > Is there any > > good reason for that either? > > No idea... I have never used anything other than the lowercase > versions. It comes from the numeric literals. C allows 0x0 and 0X0, and 0L as well as 0l. So does Python (and also 0j == 0J). > > This just seems to lead to ambiguity and unneeded complexity: > > more cases in tokenize.py, more cases in tokenize.c, more work > > for IDLE, more annoying when searching for u' in your editor. > > (I was about to fix the lack of u'' support in tokenize.py and > > that made me think about this.) > > > > What happened to TOOWTDI? > > > > Would you believe we now have 36 different ways of starting a string: > > > > ' " ''' """ > > r' r" r''' r""" > > u' u" u''' u""" > > ur' ur" ur''' ur""" > > R' R" R''' R""" > > U' U" U''' U""" > > uR' uR" uR''' uR""" > > Ur' Ur" Ur''' Ur""" > > UR' UR" UR''' UR""" > > > > Would it be outrageous to suggest deprecating the last five rows? > > No. + 1 on the idea. Why bother? All that does is outdate a bunch of documentation. I don't see the extra effort in various parsers as a big deal. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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