[Python-3000] String literal representation of integers (octal/binary discussion)
pmaupin at gmail.com
Mon Mar 19 00:58:10 CET 2007
On 3/18/07, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> I just want to add that I've adapted and extended Thomas' original patch
> for the 0o123 syntax. It should be pretty complete.
> Open issues would probably be:
> - should int("0755", 0) give 0o755? (IMO yes)
The PEP covers this, with the answer current of "yes" for 2.6 and
"exception" for 3.0. (It presumes int(x, 0) should be the same as the
compiler tokenizer result.)
> - what should "%#o" % 100 result in? "0144" or "0o144"?
> - should oct(100) return "0144" or "0o144"?
Thanks! I missed that the formatter had the '#' option, and
completely forgot about the oct() function. I think TOOWTDI says
0o144 in both cases.
OTOH, does anybody actually use the oct() function? Has the issue of
hex() and oct() remaining builtin been covered? Should we add a
matching bin() or remove oct()?
Also, PEP 3101 does not currently contain the '#' "alternate form'
specifier. Is this an oversight which needs to be corrected?
More information about the Python-3000