Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.001 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'programmer': 0.03; '(at': 0.04; 'resulting': 0.04; 'interpreter': 0.05; 'string': 0.09; 'agree,': 0.09; 'python': 0.11; 'itself.': 0.14; '(sorry': 0.16; 'interpreter,': 0.16; 'itself,': 0.16; 'ought': 0.16; 'repr': 0.16; 'spurious': 0.16; 'subject:Unicode': 0.16; 'tuple': 0.16; 'tuples,': 0.16; 'utterly': 0.16; ':-)': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'meant': 0.20; 'seems': 0.21; '2.x': 0.24; 'helper': 0.24; 'stephen': 0.24; 'least': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'idea': 0.28; 'function': 0.29; 'am,': 0.29; 'compared': 0.30; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; 'object.': 0.31; 'fri,': 0.33; 'programmers': 0.33; 'could': 0.34; 'something': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'acceptable': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'too': 0.37; 'question,': 0.38; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.38; 'explain': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'even': 0.60; 'more': 0.64; 'between': 0.67; 'different.': 0.84; 'otten': 0.84; '2013': 0.98 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=JaBK5L/T6UX0mgUqTc4a+b67DYZqvE8js0dPds1V1a0=; b=ji1OBroPe+pUGIw3tbZAdyLNaJDd3e0eJX0mf++9VU5+krcji+hHRPxEYWA2Kw7Yk8 1JWeEJCOdnjUYRXWQmDQ6APfR8QAF75+ktxnXan5ZkqkwOdSXrHsSxNeckqDX3mCQ6ID oHsUdQODkRqEyrXiZc0Ros/e0+3DKxFoEN/ZUqBSvNHdxv7oHzQf02QzhqoCJEY2Ffn2 j9Mmqa14PgLNz+HVGQRBr2LOHrR5gOmEu0NLnWJUK5o9WaG3QpDJJ1zdBCRFE1x0mCkY 0BVUtoYcYTmazf1rbOgmZTdTNuxoLdXdmfXvmmTahEN7nuT6JjhH1cVOAM3xyZ5A0CHL 2VNA== X-Received: by 10.66.150.69 with SMTP id ug5mr25917824pab.55.1381558843092; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 23:20:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <5257C35C.4070407@nedbatchelder.com> From: Ian Kelly Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2013 00:20:02 -0600 Subject: Re: Unicode Objects in Tuples To: Python Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 18 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1381558852 news.xs4all.nl 15936 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:46493 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:56725 On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Stephen Tucker wrote: > On the original question, well, I accept Ned's answer (at 10.22). I also > like the idea of a helper function given by Peter Otten at 09.51. It still > seems like a crutch to help poor old Python 2.X to do what any programmer > (or, at least the programmers like me :-) ) think it ought to be able to by > itself. The distinction between the "geekiness" of a tuple compared with the > "non-geekiness" of a string is, itself, far too geeky for my liking. The > distinction seems to be an utterly spurious - even artificial or arbitrary > one to me. (Sorry about the rant.) I agree, and that's not how I would explain the distinction. The str of an object is meant to be human-readable, while the repr of an object is meant to be something that could be pasted into the interpreter to reconstruct the object. In the case of tuples, the repr of the tuple uses the reprs of the components because the resulting string will more likely be acceptable to the interpreter, and the str of the tuple is the same as the repr because there is no convincing reason why it should be different.