A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-October/092484.html below:

[Python-Dev] transitioning from % to {} formatting

[Python-Dev] transitioning from % to {} formatting [Python-Dev] transitioning from % to {} formattingRaymond Hettinger python at rcn.com
Fri Oct 2 20:56:54 CEST 2009
[Steven Bethard]
>. Just saying "ok, switch your format strings
> from % to {}" didn't work in Python 3.0 for various good reasons, and
> I can't imagine it will work in Python 4.0 unless we have a transition
> plan.

Do the users get any say in this?
I imagine that some people are heavily invested in %-formatting.

Because there has been limited uptake on {}-formatting (afaict),
we still have limited experience with knowing that it is actually
better, less error-prone, easier to learn/rember, etc.   Outside
a handful of people on this list, I have yet to see anyone adopt
it as the preferred syntax. 

Raymond


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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