On 8/8/2015 9:08 PM, Tim Delaney wrote:
> On 8 August 2015 at 11:39, Eric V. Smith <eric at trueblade.com
> <mailto:eric at trueblade.com>> wrote:
>
> Following a long discussion on python-ideas, I've posted my draft of
> PEP-498. It describes the "f-string" approach that was the subject of
> the "Briefer string format" thread. I'm open to a better title than
> "Literal String Formatting".
>
> I need to add some text to the discussion section, but I think it's in
> reasonable shape. I have a fully working implementation that I'll get
> around to posting somewhere this weekend.
>
> >>> def how_awesome(): return 'very'
> ...
> >>> f'f-strings are {how_awesome()} awesome!'
> 'f-strings are very awesome!'
>
> I'm open to any suggestions to improve the PEP. Thanks for your
> feedback.
>
>
> I'd like to see an alternatives section, in particular listing
> alternative prefixes and why they weren't chosen over f. Off the top of
> my head, ones I've seen listed are:
>
> !
> $
I'll add something, but there's no particular reason. "f" for formatted,
along the lines of 'r' raw, 'b' bytes, and 'u' unicode.
Especially when you want to combine them, I think a letter looks better:
fr'{x} a formatted raw string'
$r'{x} a formatted raw string'
Eric.
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