On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 2:20 AM, Mikhail V <mikhail...@gmail.com> wrote: > [Richard Damon] > >> The one major issue with backslashes is that they are a special >> character in string literals, so you either need to use raw literals a >> remember the few cases they still act as special characters, or remember >> to convert them to double back slashes, at a minimum for all the >> characters that they are special for (easier to double them all). > >> I think it was originally an error to make the backslash followed by a >> character not defined as special with a backslash as keeping the >> backslash as a literal as it causes a number of these issues. Yes, it >> allows you to not need to double it in many cases but that just sets you >> up for the mistakes that started the thread. It is probably too late to >> change that behavior now though. > > Yes this would at least make less mistakes. > I find the whole situation with strings a bit disappointing. > On the one hand - there were so many string types added, on the other > hand - there are still many inconveniences. There is an english proverb, > "it does too much, but still too little". (or something like that) > > The initial string syntax -- I think it's direct copy of C strings syntax. > And it sucks. (path dependency?) > > I'd say there should be just two main string types: > 1. string literal where all special character goes into, say, figure braces > {}; > (if only there was a time machine) > 2. raw strings, including multiline raw strings which should be PEP-8 > compliant. > > So Imo default syntax should be something like: > > S = "A:{x41}B:{x42}" > > instead of backslashes and Co.
So how do you represent brace characters in a string? > 2. raw strings, including multiline raw strings which should be PEP-8 > compliant. ??? ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list