RetroSearch Browse

Thu Mar 27 12:26:50 CET 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-March/133583.html

On 27 March 2014 20:47, Victor Stinner <victor.stinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> The PEP 461 looks good to me. It's a nice addition to Python 3.5 and
> the PEP is well defined.

+1 from me as well. One minor request is that I don't think the
rationale for rejecting numbers from "%s" is incomplete - IIRC, the
problem there is that the normal path for handling those is the
coercion via str() and this proposal deliberately *doesn't* allow that
path. That means supporting numbers would mean writing a lot of
*additional* code, and that isn't needed since 2/3 compatible code can
just be adjusted to use an appropriate numeric code.

> Note: I fixed a typo in your PEP (reST syntax).

I also committed a couple of markup tweaks, since it seemed easier to
just fix them than explain what was broken. However, there are also
two dead footnotes (4 & 5), which I have left alone - I'm not sure if
the problem is a missing reference, or if the footnote can go away
now.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-March/133583.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 461: Adding % formatting to bytes and bytearray -- Final, Take 3