On Sep 30, 2009, at 11:22 AM, Steven Bethard wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 5:21 AM, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote:On Sep 29, 2009, at 11:15 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:I would propose that the format argument gets an argument name, according to the syntax it is written in. For PEP 3101 format, I would call the argument "format" (like the method name of the string type), i.e. logging.Formatter( format="{asctime} - {name} - {levelname} - {message}") For the % formatting, I suggest "dicttemplate" (assuming that you *have* to use dictionary %(key)s style currently). The positional parameter would also mean dicttemplate, and would be deprecated (eventually requiring a keyword-only parameter).Although I hate the name 'dicttemplate', this seems like the best solution to me. Maybe it's good that 'dicttemplate' is so ugly though so that people will naturally prefer 'format' :). But I like this because there's not really any magic, it's explicit, and the decision is made by the coder atthe call site. The implementation does not need to guess at all.Could you comment on what you think we should do when the parameter is not positional? As I mentioned upthread, in the case of logging.Formatter, it's already documented as taking the keyword parameter "fmt", so we'd have to use the name "fmt" for % formatting.
I'm okay with fmt==%-formatting and format=={}-formatting, but I'd also be okay with transitioning 'fmt' to 'dicttemplate' or whatever. I think the important thing is to be explicit in the method signature which one you want (secondary would be trying to standardize this across the stdlib).
-Barry
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
