On 08/09/2015 06:14 PM, Mike Miller wrote:
My take:
On 08/09/2015 02:20 PM, Ron Adam wrote:
It may be possible to do that in this case as an actual expression rather than as a string and still get most of the benefits. Shorter more compressed isn't always better when it comes to readability.
Really the idea here is brevity. The long-form versions are still available if they would be better in a particular instance.
(% 'result =' foo())
I found these interesting, reminds me of polish notation. However these would need enhancements to syntax as it would be currently invalid. f'' is likely easier to implement w/o syntax changes. Also, it doesn't look much like python.
There are actually too parts... (% ...) Handles implicit concatination and string conversion. And {expr format} handles the formatting, inside (% ...) context only. So these only work in string format expressions, just like special syntax for comprehensions only works in comprehensions. As I suggested, I think it's the closest you can get and still not put the expressions into the strings. Comma's could be used to separate things, but it's not that much of a stretch to go from .... 'a' 'b' --> 'ab' to a = 'a' b = 'b' (% a b) --> 'ab' But we could have... (% a, b) If that seems more pythonic. Cheers, Ron