On 23 February 2014 13:47, Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> wrote: > On 22Feb2014 17:56, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote: >> Please let me know if anything else needs tweaking. >> [...] >> This area of programming is characterized by a mixture of binary data and >> ASCII compatible segments of text (aka ASCII-encoded text). >> [...] >> %-interpolation >> >> All the numeric formatting codes (such as ``%x``, ``%o``, ``%e``, ``%f``, >> ``%g``, etc.) will be supported, and will work as they do for str, including >> the padding, justification and other related modifiers. > > I would like a single sentence here clarifying that the formatting > of numeric values uses an ASCII encoding. > > It might be inferred from the earlier context, but I do not think > it can be deduced and therefore I think it should be said outright. > All the other formatting codes are quite explicit about how their > arguments transform into bytes, but the numeric codes just quietly > assume ASCII. The PEP should be blatant. Specifically, I believe the PEP should state that, for the numeric codes: b"%x" % val is equivalent to: b"%s" % (("%x" % val).encode("ascii")) The rationale for including them is the unreadability of the latter form :) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
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