RetroSearch Browse

Mon May 1 22:31:53 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-May/064747.html

Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> for some reason, the language reference uses the term "string con-
> version" for the backtick form of "repr":
>   
The language reference also says that trailing commas for expressions 
work with backticks. This is incorrect. I think this is necessary to 
allow nested 'string conversions', so it is a doc error rather than an 
implementation error.

I can't think of a better term than string conversion. At least it is 
distinct from 'string formatting'.

Personally I think that backticks in code look like an ugly hack and 
``repr(expression)`` is clearer. If backticks were documented as a 
hackish shortcut for repr then great. :-)

Michael Foord

>     http://docs.python.org/ref/string-conversions.html
>
> any suggestions for a better term ?  should backticks be deprecated,
> and documented in terms of repr (rather than the other way around) ?
>
> </F>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/fuzzyman%40voidspace.org.uk
>
>   

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-May/064747.html below:

[Python-Dev] more pyref: a better term for "string conversion"