Possible bug in string handling (with kludgy work-around)

[Lie Ryan]

On 12/28/2011 05:04 AM, Rick Johnson wrote:
> --
> Note: superfluous indention removed for clarity!
> --
>
> On Dec 27, 8:53 am, Dennis Lee Bieber<wlfr... at ix.netcom.com>  wrote:
>> You can get by without the backslash in this situation too, by using
>> triple quoting:
>
> I would not do that because:
> 1. Because Python already has TWO string literal delimiters (' and ")
> 2. Because triple quote string literals are SPECIFICALLY created to
> solve the "multi-line issue"
> 3. Because you can confuse the hell out of someone who is reading
> Python code and they may miss the true purpose of triple quotes in
> Python
>
> But this brings up a very important topic. Why do we even need triple
> quote string literals to span multiple lines? Good question, and one i
> have never really mused on until now. It's amazing how much BS we just
> accept blindly! WE DON'T NEED TRIPLE QUOTE STRINGS! What we need is
> single quote strings that span multiple lines and triple quotes then
> become superfluous! For the problem of embedding quotes in string
> literals, we should be using markup. A SIMPLISTIC MARKUP!
>
> " This is a multi line
> string with a single quote -->  <SQ>
> and a double quote -->  <DQ>. Here is an
> embedded newline -->  <NL>. And a backspace<BS>.
>
> Now we can dispense with all the BS!
> "

Ok, you're trolling.