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/2012-February/116846.html below:

[Python-Dev] Status regarding Old vs. Advanced String Formating

[Python-Dev] Status regarding Old vs. Advanced String Formating [Python-Dev] Status regarding Old vs. Advanced String FormatingEli Bendersky eliben at gmail.com
Sun Feb 26 09:42:12 CET 2012
> Indeed, that note was written before we decided that getting rid of
> "%" formatting altogether would be a bad idea.
>
> It would be better to update it to say something like:
>
> "The formatting operations described here are modelled on C's printf()
> syntax. They only support formatting of certain builtin types, and the
> use of a binary operator means that care may be needed in order to
> format tuples and dictionaries correctly. As the new string formatting
> syntax is more powerful, flexible, extensible and handles tuples and
> dictionaries naturally, it is recommended for new code. However, there
> are no current plans to deprecate printf-style formatting."
>

+1 on rephrasing that doc section, but I wouldn't mention deprecation at
all. It's alright to keep calling % formatting "old style" and encouraging
.format instead, of course.

Eli
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120226/cc9b45cb/attachment.html>
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