Re: Engineering numerical format PEP discussion

Mark Dickinson wrote:
On Apr 26, 4:36 am, Keith <keith.braff...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am considering writing a PEP for the inclusion of an engineering
format specifier, and would appreciate input from others.

[...]

I am thinking that if we simply added something like %n (for eNgineer)
to the list of format specifiers that we could make life easier for
engineers:

("%n" % 12345) == "12.345e+03"
("%n" % 1234) == "1.234e+03"
("%n" % 123) == "123e+00"
("%n" % 1.2345e-5) == "12.345e+06"

I don't think there's much chance of getting changes to old-style
string formatting accepted; you might be better off aiming at the new-
style string formatting. (And there, the 'n' modifier is already
taken for internationalization, so you'd have to find something
different. :)

"e" is already used, "n" is already used, "g" is already used, etc

"t" for "powers of a thousand", perhaps? (Or "m"?)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Engineering numerical format PEP discussion
    ... format specifier, and would appreciate input from others. ... string formatting accepted; you might be better off aiming at the new- ... or perhaps as an extension to 'e', ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Engineering numerical format PEP discussion
    ... format specifier, and would appreciate input from others. ... string formatting accepted; you might be better off aiming at the new- ... taken for internationalization, so you'd have to find something ...
    (comp.lang.python)