[Python-3000] PEP 3101 update
Talin
talin at acm.org
Thu Jun 15 06:57:26 CEST 2006
Rudy Rudolph wrote:
> Center- and decimal-align nicely round out the left-align,
> right-align, and pad-after-sign formatting already proposed,
> and are easy to implement. I therefore ask that they be added
> to the PEP. BTW, I very much like the proposal in the PEP.
The basic idea of a decimal align option sounds good to me. I even
started working up an implementation, but I haven't had the time to
finish it -- I decided to go with the '^' character as an alignment symbol.
Greg Ewing's point that this is effectively the same as "pad with
spaces" is correct, however I don't think that's the way most people
think of it - in other words, generally what people ask for is "line up
all the decimal points".
Here's my concern however: PEP 3101 is getting rather large, because of
all of these little details that are ancilliary to the primary proposal
of a 'format' method for string objects. I've already pushed back on
Nick Coghlan's otherwise excellent suggestion of allowing the same set
of conversion specifiers to be used as a second argument to str() for
this reason.
(I thought about breaking out the conversion specifiers into a separate
PEP, but since they aren't meaningful by themselves it makes no sense to
accept one PEP and reject another, and also because then I'd have 3 PEPs
in the Python-3000 queue [including 3102], and right now 2 is as much as
I want to deal with.)
Because 3101 is targeted at Python-3000, and because 3000 is scheduled
for release in the distant future, I have no sense as to what the
timetable is for acceptance or adoption of this PEP; As far as I know,
it could be a year or more before a decision is made, and the PEP might
be rejected at the end of that time. So from my point of view, I am
faced with the prospect of an ever-expanding PEP as people continue to
think of new suggestions over the course of the next year, all of which
may come to naught.
My feeling is that a good PEP should contain a limited number of BDFL
decisions - that is, it should be possible for Guido to go down the
checklist and accept / reject / suggest changes to a small number of
essential bullet points. I fear that PEP 3101 is going to turn into a
kind of omnibus bill with all kinds of little amendments to deal with.
For this reason, I'd like to put some sort of limit on lower-level
details of the PEP, and let that detail be filled in via the normal
feature request / patch submission process once the PEP has actually
been accepted.
I guess what I also need to do is find some place to post my prototype
so that people can criticize it and submit patches to it. What would be
ideal for my purposes would be if there was a "research" branch in the
Python svn so that wild-eyed radicals such as myself could check in code
that is still being discussed by the community and is not yet intended
for inclusion in the main tree. This would also allow people who have
suggestions to submit patches to the prototype, rather than having to
ask me to do it for them.
-- Talin
More information about the Python-3000
mailing list