On 29.08.2016 05:40, Brendan Barnwell wrote:
On 2016-08-28 20:29, Ken Kundert wrote:
What is wrong with have two ways of doing things? We have many ways of
specifying the value of the integer 16: 0b10000, 0o20, 16, 0x10, 16L,
....
Zen of Python: "There should be one-- and preferably only one
--obvious way to do it."
If Python didn't have binary or octal notation and someone came
here proposing it, I would not support it, for the same reasons I
don't support your proposal. If someone proposed eliminating binary
or octal notation for Python 4 (or even maybe Python 3.8), I would
probably support it for the same reason. Those notations are not
useful enough to justify their existence. Hexadecimal is more
justifiable as it is far more widely used, but I would be more open to
removing hexadecimal than I would be to adding octal.
Also, "L" as a long-integer suffix is already gone in Python 3.
And now we have '_' in numbers.
So much for "preferably one way".
Sven
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
