[Python-Dev] Easier debugging with f-strings (original) (raw)
Steven D'Aprano steve at pearwood.info
Tue May 7 20:39:37 EDT 2019
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Easier debugging with f-strings
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Easier debugging with f-strings
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Disclaimer: this topic seems to have been split over at least two issues on the bug tracker, a Python-Ideas thread from 2018, Discourse (I think...) and who knows what else. I haven't read it all, so excuse me if I'm raising something already discussed.
On Mon, May 06, 2019 at 08:39:41PM -0400, Eric V. Smith wrote:
After that lightning talk, Larry and I talked about it some more, and for a number of reasons decided that it would make more sense if the syntax used an = sign. So we came up with f"{foo=}", which would also produce "foo='Hello'".
The reasons for the change are: - Having '=' in the expression is a better mnemonic than !d. - By not using a conversion starting with !, we can compose = with the existing ! conversions, !r, !s, and the rarely used !a. - We can let the user have a little more control of the resulting string.
You're going to hate me for bike-shedding, but I really don't like using = as a defacto unary postfix operator. To me, spam= is always going to look like it was meant to be spam== and the second half got accidentally deleted.
I don't have a better suggestion, sorry.
In an earlier draft, back when this was spelled !d, you specifically talked about whitespace. Does this still apply?
spam = 42
f'{spam=}' # returns 'spam=42'
f'{spam =}' # returns 'spam =42'
f'{spam = }' # returns 'spam = 42' I guess?
f'{spam+1=}' # returns 'spam+1=41' I guess?
-- Steven
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Easier debugging with f-strings
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Easier debugging with f-strings
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]