Dag Moxnes wrote:
Hi list,
I'm sorry if this has been discussed before, but I did not find any references. I've been playing abit with the new str.format function. I really like the syntax and simplicity.
However, when simply printing named variables in locals() or a class, I quite common use-case, I find it a bit too complicated with the **:
"Local variable var1 is %(var1)s" % locals()
vs
"Local variable var1 is {var1}".format(**locals())
I see nothing compicated about **. In any case, it is a common idiom that Python progrmmers should learn and hopefully become comfortable with. I see nothing gained with s.easyformat(s, locals()) # over s.format(**locals) except a few extra chars to type ;-). If you were doing that often, you could write def lform(s): # format caller locals l = <locals of caller> # ask on Python list or check python recipies return s.format(**l)
"Instance variable var2 is %(var2)s" % self.__dict__
vs
"Instance variable var2 is {var2}" % **self.__dict__\
You meant, "Instance variable var2 is {var2}".format(**self.__dict__) Wrapping this seems like a possible method. For a constant format applicable to all instances, override .__str__().
def easyformat(s, data): try: return s.format(**data) except TypeError: return s.format(**data.__dict__)
Should a function similar to this (maybe with a better name) be included in some standard library?
I think not. Terry Jan Reedy