Skip to content

PEP 786: Precision and Modulo-Precision Flag format specifiers for integer fields #4416

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
jb2170 wants to merge 19 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

PEP 786: Precision and Modulo-Precision Flag format specifiers for integer fields #4416

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
19 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
9c0ef26
First main commit to PEP 791
jb2170 Apr 11, 2025
4e0e75e
791 -> 786
AA-Turner May 6, 2025
bd628a0
Add Alyssa as the sponsor of PEP 786
jb2170 May 8, 2025
ac5024d
Update .github/CODEOWNERS adding @ncoghlan for PEP 786
jb2170 May 8, 2025
3ca6120
Address AA-Turner's notes
jb2170 May 8, 2025
bd29ea4
Remove TODO bullet point for `z` and `#` commutativity
jb2170 May 8, 2025
d7d9cf0
Apply the more trivial suggestions from code review
jb2170 May 16, 2025
d1e47e4
Hyphenate 8-bit etc when appropriate
jb2170 May 16, 2025
be6f1dd
Correct 'defacto' -> 'de facto'
jb2170 May 16, 2025
b5c3b24
Reword the verdict of '!' syntax to not sound like there already is c…
jb2170 May 16, 2025
17a5532
Remove TODO bullet point for authorship
jb2170 May 16, 2025
a06e982
Reword 45 and -19 being indistinguishable modulo 64, '101101'
jb2170 May 16, 2025
2086547
Remove Sergey from Thanks as per his request
jb2170 May 22, 2025
d477f4c
Restructure Abstract and remove mentions to divmod
jb2170 May 22, 2025
e49ebdf
Fix quoting style; when quoting a whole sentence one should keep the …
jb2170 May 22, 2025
9cd0077
Remove TODO bullet point about RFC 2119
jb2170 May 22, 2025
565466d
Format to ~80 chars
jb2170 May 22, 2025
045df95
Restructure section about two cases of truncation
jb2170 May 22, 2025
5325a70
Ready for review
jb2170 May 22, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Prev Previous commit
Next Next commit
Address AA-Turner's notes
  • Loading branch information
@jb2170
jb2170 committed May 8, 2025
commit 3ca612051846f6389ba227487932d4b7729dc8fc
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions peps/pep-0786.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,8 +5,8 @@ Sponsor: Alyssa Coghlan <[email protected]>
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Created: 04-Apr-2025
Python-Version: Pending
Post-History: `14-Feb-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/implement-precision-format-spec-for-int-type-data/80760>`__
Python-Version: 3.15
Post-History: `14-Feb-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/80760>`__,


Abstract
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -353,8 +353,8 @@ TODO AND REMOVE BEFORE MERGE
The existing `format specification <formatspec_>`_ mandates that if both ``z`` and ``#`` are to be used, they must appear in that order, leading to ``z#.``, with ``z`` separated from its ``.``, however this could be changed to be more permissible if there are no syntax clashes, to permit ``#z.``, or is this just my taste? :pep:`682` proposed / uses ``[sign][z]`` instead of ``[sign[z]]``, which has given us the opportunity to reuse ``z``, and really has no strict need to be ``[sign][z][#]...[.precision]``, or are we doing too much voodoo by allowing ``z`` and ``#`` to commute with each other, even if it's just for ``int`` fields. I'm starting to think this might be too much voodoo.


..
FOOTNOTES
Footnotes
=========

.. _formatstrings: https://docs.python.org/3/library/string.html#formatstrings
.. _formatspec: https://docs.python.org/3/library/string.html#formatspec