I quite like StringLiteral personally, but I understand Andrew's concerns about "string literal" having a very specific meaning. I think something like LiteralDerivedString more clearly captures what we're trying to achieve with this PEP (ie. any string which is composed of literal strings, with allowances for standard string transformations), but it's also unfortunately more wordy. Thoughts on that option?
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 2:52 PM Martin DeMello via Typing-sig
<typing-sig@python.org> wrote:
> I would suggest StringLiteral, since that's the common term, and further differentiates it from Literal[str] when read aloud.
Except it's a common term for a different thing. In my experience,
most languages seem to restrict the "string literal" terminology to
mean compile time values that exist in the source code (or at least
could be generated by a constant folding pass.)
As I understand it, a 675String (not my naming suggestion! just a
placeholder :) also includes runtime values that can be assembled from
string literals by way of arbitrary runtime computation. I think
that's an important distinction, and one that would be muddled by
reusing an existing term that typically means something else.
--
_______________________________________________
Typing-sig mailing list -- typing-sig@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to typing-sig-leave@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/typing-sig.python.org/
Member address: hauntsaninja@gmail.com