(original) (raw)
Actually, I had ignored this discussion for so long that I was surprised by the outcome. My main use case isn't printing a number that may already be a string (I understand why that isn't reasonable when the output is expected to be bytes); it's printing a usually numeric value that may sometimes be None. It's a little surprising to have to use %a for this, but I guess I can live with it.
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote:
On 03/27/2014 04:42 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
I also seem to recall Guido saying he liked it \[%a\], which flipped the
discussion from "do we have a good rationale for including it?" to "do
we have a good rationale for the BDFL to ignore his instincts?".
However, it would be up to Guido to confirm that recollection, and if
"Guido likes it" is part of the reason for inclusion of the %a code,
the PEP should mention that explicitly.
I checked Guido's posts (Subject contains PEP 461, From contains guido) and did not see anything to that effect.
\--
\~Ethan\~
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/\~guido)