[Python-Dev] PEP 461 - Adding % and {} formatting to bytes (original) (raw)

Ethan Furman ethan at stoneleaf.us
Fri Jan 17 18:38:59 CET 2014

On 01/17/2014 09:13 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote:

On 01/17/2014 11:58 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:

On Jan 17, 2014, at 11:00 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:

I would rephrase it to "switch to %-formatting for bytes usage for their common code base". -1. %-formatting is so neanderthal. :) Very much so, which is why I'm willing to let it be bastardized in Python 3.5 for the sake of porting but not bytes.format(). =) I'm keeping format() clean for my nieces and nephew to use; they can just turn their nose up at %-formatting when they are old enough to program. Given the problems with implementing it, I'm more than willing to drop bytes.format() from PEP 461 (not that it's my PEP). But if we think that %-formatting is neanderthal and will get dropped in the Python 4000 timeframe

I hope not!

(that is, someday in the far future), then I think we should have some advice to give to people who are writing new 3.x code for the non-porting use-cases addressed by the PEP. I'm specifically thinking of new code that wants to format some bytes for an on-the-wire ascii-like protocol.

%-interpolation handles this use case well, format does not.

Is it: b'Content-Length: ' + str(47).encode('ascii') or b'Content-Length: {}.format(str(47).encode('ascii')) or something better?

Ew. Neither of those look better than

 b'Content-Length: %d' % 47

-- Ethan

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list