FAQ: __str__ vs __repr__
peter at engcorp.com
Tue Jun 21 14:12:27 CEST 2005
Simon Brunning wrote:
> On 6/15/05, Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com> wrote:
>>__repr__ shouldn't be anything, if you don't have an actual need for it.
>> Neither should __str__.
> Oh, I don't know. __str__ is so frequently useful in debugging and
> logging that I always try and do something useful with it.
Interesting: for the same purpose, I would define __repr__.
But I still define it only when I actually care about the details, since
otherwise the default __repr__ is always there. Spending time figuring
out a potentially more useful __str__/__repr__ (how nice that we've
confused the issue of which to use, again! ;-) ) is not my idea of a
good use of time, what with YAGNI and all from XP...
More information about the Python-list