[docs] [issue29928] Add f-strings to Glossary

[Brett Cannon]

Brett Cannon added the comment:

I think we're getting bogged down in a larger scope than this issue is about. All we should be discussing in this issue is whether adding an entry in the glossary for "f-string" as it's already being used in the community is bad (which I don't think it is since it's seeing use "in the wild"). No one is suggesting we change all the documentation to start using the shorthand/slang term, nor to introduce entries for other types of string literals where the community has not started using such terms (e.g. r-strings for raw strings). Heck, the docs already use "f-string" internally as a link target, i.e. https://docs.python.org/3/reference/lexical_analysis.html#f-strings (notice the intra-page link target).

IOW this is just making it easier for someone who comes across the term "f-string" to know what it means when they see it on e.g. Twitter, not trying to come up with a more accurate shorthand.

----------
nosy: +brett.cannon

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue29928>
_______________________________________