31 May
2001
31 May
'01
3:59 a.m.
[Eric S. Raymond]
Is the right answer to add the convert-to-base slot and deprecate the other two?
That would fix "the other" lump here in Python, that e.g.
int("111", 3) 13
has no inverse. string->int is happy with any base in 2..36 inclusive, but int->string is spelled via 3 different builtins covering only 3 of those bases. It would be more *expedient* to add "just" a __bin__/nb_bin method + a way to spell binary int literals + a %b format + a bin() builtin. On the fifth hand, I doubt anyone would want to add new % format codes for bases {2..36} - {2, 8, 10, 16}. So it will remain lumpy no matter what. I look forward to the PEP <wink>.