[Python-ideas] Alternate quote delimiters

[Chris Rebert]

On 5/11/07, Ron Adam <rrr at ronadam.com> wrote:
>
> While watching the various issues about raw strings and quotes being
> discussed, I decided look into other ways to resolve string delimiter
> collisions that might also improve pythons string handling in general.
>
> And I'd figure I'd let it get shot full of holes here first. ;-)

Here come the first shots. ;-)

> So how about a multiple quoting solution?  The examples of this in the wiki
> page are of the form...
>
>     qq^I said, "Can you hear me?"^
>
>     qq at I said, "Can you hear me?"@
>
>     qq§I said, "Can you hear me?"§
>
>
> But that doesn't fit well with pythons use of quotes.  But a variation of
> this would.  Add a 'q' string prefix similar to the 'u' and 'r' prefix's
> that takes the first character inside the quotes as an additional
> delimiter.  Then ending quote will then need to have that same character
> proceeding it.
>
>     q"^I said, "Can you hear me?"^"
>
>     q"""|I said, "Can you hear me?"|"""
>
> The vertical bar is part of the quote here, not part of the string.

Ick. This will make python code harder to parse (I wonder whether the
current parser even do what you propose), and isn't that much of an
improvement in ease of expression. Also, this seems way too perlish
for my tastes. There should be only one way to do quoting, but
practicality beat purity for quotes and regexes. However, allowing
arbitrary quoting characters seems like overkill.

> Because the beginning and ending of the strings are not identical, it's
> possible that they can allow nesting.
>
>      rq"""^
>          rq"""^
>                    This is a nested string.
>          ^"""
>          """
>                    Another nested string.
>          """
>      ^"""
>
>
> The most useful feature of this would be in temporarily commenting out
> large blocks of python code.  Currently this doesn't work well if the block
> that contain triple quoted doc strings.

A block commenting syntax may be useful, however I don't like this
proposal because of the previous point. Also, most python editors let
you block comment out stuff with a command to add the appropriate #s
pretty easily.

> Another option might be to designate certain quote delimiters for special
> purposes.
>
>      Dedented strings.
>
>      q"""<
>          This is a
>          Dedented
>          Paragraph.
>      <"""
>
>
>      Commented out source code.
>
>      q"""#
>      def foo(bar):
>          """
>             A bar checker.
>          """
>          return bar is True
>      #"""

I'm neutral on these.

>      ReST formatted strings.
>
>      rq""":
>          Bullet lists:
>
>          - This is item 1
>          - This is item 2
>
>          - Bullets are "-", "*" or "+".
>            Continuing text must be aligned
>            after the bullet and whitespace.
>
>          Note that a blank line is required
>          before the first item and after the
>          last, but is optional between items.
>      :"""

Seems like a little much to have syntax for ReST. Is it used
frequently enough to justify adding this?

- Chris Rebert