__str__ vs. __repr__

[Tim Peters]

[Toby Dickenson:]
> Tim's Rat class is a good example of how __repr__ should not be
> implemented, because it exposes the internal representation of
> the object, not the external value.

[Rat's Tim class]
> Beg to differ:  it's an excellent example of how __repr__ should
> be implemented.

[Jeremy Hylton]
> It's no accident that the function is called __repr__.  It's role is
> to expose the representation.

No, in that case it would have been named __representation__.  __repr__ is
actually an acronym, meaning Regular-Expression Parsable Rendition.
Similarly __str__ is short for Simpler Than Repr.  I never learned what
__init__ stands for -- it never interested Tim <wink>.

guess-what-wink-stands-for-and-win-a-fabulous-prize!-ly y'rs  - tim