It has not to break current code:
def repr(obj, allowed_tuple = False):
r = type(obj).__repr__()
if allowed_tuple:
return r
if isinstance(r, tuple):
r = make_str(type(obj), r)
return r
At 2017-03-01 09:58:35, "Matthias welp" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 1 March 2017 at 02:18, qhlonline <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Yes, We are both python users with languages OTHER then English, It is a
>> headache when looking at the print output of dicts with other language
>> encoding. They are just byte array. I am using python2.7
>
>Please note that unless this is still a problem in python 3, this is
>unlikely to be changed.
>
>__repr__ is (as per the docs) 'a printable string representation of
>the object'. If this were to get changed, many APIs might be broken
>due to tuples not having the same methods and/or features as strings,
>e.g. you cannot use them as a path. Not saying that they will, but
>it's potentially breaking a lot of code which interacts with other
>programs, and maybe even some internals.
>
>You are free to experiment with overriding/extending __repr__ for your
>internal usage, but please note that it might break external libraries
>depending on obj.__repr__ or repr(obj), and print() might break when
>using built-in types as containers for your objects.
>
>I am a -1 on changing __repr__'s signature.
>
>-Matthias
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
