Eric Smith wrote: > Terry Reedy wrote: >> Ron Adam wrote: >>> >>> >>> Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>>> Michael Foord wrote: >>>> >>>>> Don't we have a pretty-print API - and isn't it spelled __str__ ? >>>> >>>> Not really. If it were as simple as calling str(obj), there would be >>>> no need for the pprint module. >>> >>> I agree. And when I want to use pprint, there are usually additional >>> output formatting requirements I need that isn't a "one size fits >>> all" type of problem. > > I don't see how you can have a standard interface (like __pprint__), and > have additional, per-object formatting parameters. I don't see how you can't. Other standard methods take variable arguments: __init__, __new__, __call__ come to mind. > But that's beside the > point, I don't like __pprint__ in any event. Too special. I'm not sure what you mean by "too special". It's no more special than any other special method. Do you mean the use-case is not common enough? I would find this useful. Whether enough people would find it useful enough to add yet another special method is an open question. -- Steven
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