On Wednesday 2006-01-18 16:55, Steven Bethard wrote:
> [Raymond]
> > Perhaps introduce a single function, base(val, radix=10,
> > prefix=''), as a universal base converter that could replace
> > bin(), hex(), oct(), etc.
>
> +1 on introducing base()
Introducing a new builtin with a name that's a common, short
English word is a bit disagreeable. The other thing about the
name "base" is that it's not entirely obvious which way it
converts: do you say
base(123,5)
to get a string representing 123 in base 5, or
base("123",5)
to get the integer whose base 5 representation is "123"?
Well, one option would be to have both of those work :-).
(Some people may need to do some deep breathing while
reciting the mantra "practicality beats purity" in order
to contemplate that with equanimity.)
Alternatively, a name like "to_base" that clarifies the
intent and is less likely to clash with variable names
might be an improvement.
Or there's always %b, whether that ends up standing for
"binary" or "base". Or %b for binary and %r for radix,
not forgetting the modifiers to get numbers formatted
as Roman numerals.
--
Gareth McCaughan
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