On 03/27/2014 10:29 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I also don't understand why we can't use %b instead of %s. AFAIK %b currently doesn't mean anything and I somehow don't > expect we're likely to add it for other reasons (unless there's a proposal I'm missing?). Just like we use %a instead of > %r to remind people that it's not quite the same (since it applies .encode('ascii', 'backslashreplace')), shouldn't we > use anything *but* %s to remind people that that is also not the same (not at all, in fact)? The PEP's argument against > %b ("rejected as not adding any value either in clarity or simplicity") is hardly a good reason. The biggest reason to use %s is to support a common code base for 2/3 endeavors. The biggest reason to not include %b is that it means binary number in format(); given that each type can invent it's own mini-language, this probably isn't a very strong argument against it. I have moderate feelings for keeping %s as a synonym for %b for backwards compatibility with Py2 code (when it's appropriate). -- ~Ethan~
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