Issue 19175: Erroneous reference to "integer" in format string grammar (original) (raw)

Issue19175

Created on 2013-10-06 04:14 by davidchambers, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin. This issue is now closed.

Messages (2)
msg199024 - (view)	Author: David Chambers (davidchambers)	Date: 2013-10-06 04:14
I first raised this issue on Stack Overflow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19203194 The [replacement field grammar][1] states that an [integer][2] is a valid field_name, but this is inaccurate: >>> '{0}'.format('zero') 'zero' >>> '{0x0}.format('zero') KeyError: '0x0' >>> '{0o0}.format('zero') KeyError: '0o0' >>> '{0b0}.format('zero') KeyError: '0b0' This [comment][3] by Eric Smith suggests that the above is the intended behaviour: > get_integer uses the narrowest possible definition for integer indexes, > in order to pass all other strings to mappings. The documentation should be updated to match the actual behaviour. abarnert on Stack Overflow suggested the following change: -arg_name ::= [identifier | integer] +arg_name ::= [identifier	digit+] [1]: http://docs.python.org/2/library/string.html#format-string-syntax [2]: http://docs.python.org/2/reference/lexical_analysis.html#grammar-token-integer [3]: http://bugs.python.org/issue8985#msg107705
msg199033 - (view)	Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) *	Date: 2013-10-06 06:46
The bug is that "integer" links to the "integer" production in the Python grammar. This shouldn't happen; I'll have a look on the Sphinx side. As a workaround, "integer" can be replaced by "digit+" as requested (it occurs twice).