Nick Craig-Wood <n...@craig-wood.com> added the comment: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) wrote: > Ben, I don't think there is any value is opening more issues like > pprint-doesn't-handle-object-x (named tuples, defautdicts, deques, > generators, etc). > > As it is currently designed, pprint doesn't offer usable hooks and it is not > easy to build-out to handle new object types. For the most part, users just > cast to a list before calling pprint.
I mildly disagree, IMHO pprint should be able to make a decent job of all the built in types otherwise it loses its value as a debugging tool. It is a suprise when a built in type doesn't pprint properly. This would surely be an excellent use of the abstract base classes defined in the collections module for pprint to make a best guess as to how to print types it doesn't understand directly? > ISTM, the RightAnswer(tm) is to overhaul pprint and add hooks for handling > new objects. Ideally, there would be flexible print options and reprlib-like > features for limiting output and for marking recursive constructs with "..." That is a very good idea, but might be unecessary with the ABC idea above ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue5131> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
