New Python 3.0 string formatting - really necessary?

r rt8396 at gmail.com
Sat Dec 20 02:12:00 CET 2008


Scott,
Oh, so Python 3.0 is an Equal Opportunity Enigma, now i get it :D

Steve,
Obviously i was referring to the look, not the actuality of a tuple

Marc,
Why move away from a concise and widely accepted way of sting
formatting, just to supposedly make it a little easier for n00bs?
(which i disagree this is easier) In turn, creating more syntactical
clutter. (%s %f %d) is all you need to remember. If people can't
understand that,  i fear for the future of Humans as a species!

[bearophile],
"""So I think it's right to make Python3 become a little higher level
language even if this slows it down a little.   For the kind of
programs Python is often used for, I think this is a Win. (Ruby
programs are often slower than Python ones (because Ruby is a little
higher level than Python) but it's very useful anyway). If Python will
continue to develop in the following years (think about a Python4000)
then I think it may become good to make it become even more slower, if
this will help make it a little more higher level still."""
[/bearophile],

Yea, if your keeping up with the "Rubies" i guess. Python's strengths
are in it's simplicity -and- it's constraints. Turning Python into a
language so stupid a monkey could use it(there by slowing it down in
the process),is counter intuitive, and will chase away core followers.
Let Ruby try to include every way possible known to man to do one
simple process, just to please the most people. Are we Python coders
or "Corrupt Politicians" looking to grab every vote by trying to
please the masses thereby sacrificing our souls in the process -->
Ruby.

*It may be time to start hacking my own personal version of the Python
interpreter. hmm... Keep you ears to the ground...



More information about the Python-list mailing list