On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 07:52:23 +1000
Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 4:51 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> > The very long term view is for %-formatting to go away, but that's as far as
> > the thinking has gone. There are currently no plans to introduce any
> > deprecation warning, and I highly doubt we will even remove the feature in
> > Python 3, giving you probably at least another decade of use at our current
> > major version release schedule. =)
>
> This. Without a systematic way to detect and convert %-style to
> {}-style formatting, enforcing the switch in the 3.x series just isn't
> practical. Heck, we still haven't figured out how to convert a lot of
> higher level APIs to the new scheme in a backwards compatible way
> (that's why modules like logging still default to %-style, with
> {}-style only available via options and wrapper objects).
I think there are many people still finding %-style more practical for
simple uses, so this might be a case of "practicality beats purity"
over "there should be one obvious way to do it".
Regards
Antoine.
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