"Donn Cave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Quoth "John Roth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > ... > | str() should be something that's meaningful to a human being when > | it's printed or otherwise rendered. > > I can't believe how many people cite this explanation - meaningful, > friendly, pretty to a human being. What on earth does this mean, > that couldn't be said more unambiguously? > > According to my impression of common applications for Python programs, > rarely would anyone be looking at the output for esthetic gratification. > I mean, imagine your users casting an appraising eye over the contours > of a phrase emitted by the program, and praising the rhythmic effect of > the punctuation it chose to use, or negative space created by tabs. heh. > > Whether for human eyes or any destination, properly formed output will > carry the information that is required for the application, in a complete > and unambiguous way and in the format that is most readily processed, > and it will omit extraneous information. Are we saying anything other > than this?
I thought that's what I said. I fail to see how you derive any other meaning from it. Possibly less verbiage and a concerete example of how "meaningful" equates to "esthetics that obfustificate understanding" and does not equate to "immediately useable, without having to wade through a lot of irrelvant mental transformations" would help my understanding. John Roth > > Donn Cave, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
