print(f'{value!d}') is a lot of symbols and boilerplate to type out just for a debugging statement that will be deleted later. Especially now that breakpoint() exists, I can't really see myself using this. 

I also don't see the use case of it being within an f-string, because I've never had to interpolate a debug string within some other string or format it in a fancy way. You said it yourself, taking advantage of other f-string features isn't very useful in this case.

If other people can find a use for it, I'd suggest making it ita own function -- debug(value) or something similar.


On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 8:27 PM Eric V. Smith <> wrote:
This idea was proposed to me at the core sprints last month by Larry
Hastings. I've discussed it with a few people, who seem generally
positive about it, and we've tweaked it a little bit. I've spent some
time implementing it, and I think it's doable. I thought I'd post it
here for any additional feedback.

Here’s the idea: for f-strings, we add a !d conversion operator, which
is superficially similar to !s, !r, and !a. The meaning of !d is:
produce the text of the expression (not its value!), followed by an
equal sign, followed by the repr of the value of the expression. So:

value = 10
s = 'a string!'
print(f'next: {value+1!d}')


next: value+1=11
s='a string!'

I’m not proposing this for str.format(). It would only really make sense
for named arguments, and I don’t think
print('{value!d}'.format(value=value) is much of a win.

The result is a string, so if you really wanted to, you could use a
string formatting spec. So:


would produce:

*      value=10      *

Although I don’t think that would be very useful in general.

The mnemonic is !d for “debugging”. I’d wanted to use !=, because
there’s an equal sign involved in the result, but = is the one character
that can’t be used after ! (it’s “not equal” in expressions, and
f-strings look specifically for that case). I also mentioned !!, but I
think I prefer !d as being less confusing.

This would be used in debugging print statements, that currently end up
looking like:


and would now be:


There have been discussions about ways to specify str() vs. repr(),
using characters other than '=', adding spaces, etc. But they all end up
over-complicating what should be a simple tool, not a Swiss Army knife.


Python-ideas mailing list
Code of Conduct: