On 1/13/2014 5:14 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>> I have been going on the assumption that bytes.format() would change what
>> '{}' meant for itself and would only interpolate bytes. That convenient
>> between Python 2 and 3 since it represents what we want it to (str and bytes
>> under the hood, respectively), so it just falls through. We could also add a
>> 'b' conversion for bytes() explicitly so as to help people not accidentally
>> mix up things in bytes.format() and str.format(). But I was not suggesting
>> adding a specific format spec for bytes but instead making bytes.format()
>> just do the .encode('ascii') automatically to help with compatibility when a
>> format spec was present. If people want fancy formatting for bytes they can
>> always do it themselves before calling bytes.format().
>
> This seems hastily written (e.g. verb missing :-), and I'm not clear
> on what you are (or were) actually proposing. When exactly would
> bytes.format() need .encode('ascii')?
>
> I would be happy to wait a few hours or days for you to to write it up
> clearly, rather than responding in a hurry.
I already posted my version of this proposal, with spec and example, in
the thread "byteformat() proposal: please critique", and I added more in
response to your earlier post.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
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