Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
PROPOSAL: Allow the simple case to stay simple. Allow field names to be omitted for all fields in a string and then default to 0, 1, ... so that example above could be written as
msg = "{} == {}".format
Given that computers are glorified counting machines, it *is* a bit annoying to be required to do the counting manually. I think this is at least half the objection to switching to .format.
+1 from me. Just to make it explicit: omitting field names will be an all-or-nothing proposition: you can't omit some of them unless you omit them all. Correct?
That is my proposal. I should have made that clearer, as I now did on the tracker issue I filed. My idea was that the function could switch from current behavior to alternative behavior depending on the presence or absence of anything in the first {}. But that is up to the patch writer. tjr