Was this such a big problem?
In my experience, the GIL, faster start-up times are so much higher on the totem pole, why this now?
Was this such a big problem?
In my experience, the GIL, faster start-up times are so much higher on the totem pole, why this now?
This change isn't so much done for the sake of being able to next quotes in f-strings, it's done because there was a dedicated extra parser for the python syntax inside f-strings, but with the new parser this can be parsed without this special case extra parser.
It's all to manage technical debt.
People are so out of touch with how OSS, and the volunteer maintainers that operate it, work. It's a shame. The sense of entitlement in a subset of the userbase ("Why aren't they fixing MY issues RIGHT NOW!") is mindblowing.
Politics, other forces, compellation will emerge as a stronghold barrier to your meritocratical hopes and dreams.
I suspect, a lot of people that spend time in jupyter notebooks are in the same boat. You could argue I should be setting a variable but these are experimental scripts and it's annoying. I welcome it!
Hell, personal testimony, I don't give a rat's ass about the GIL or start-up times, but f-string limitations are a daily pain in the ass. So I'm absolutely grateful for whoever worked on this and looking forward to it.
For me that formalization is nice because they've brought f-strings into the PEG parser which can point at the precise location of a syntax error. I'm wary of the implications of arbitrarily nested f-strings for legibility... but oh well.
Being able to just use any quotes in f-strings is just godsend QOL change and probably would be the biggest reason I upgrade to 3.12 (for my pet project).
Are you aware that more than one change can be worked on at a time?
>f"""{f'''{f'{f"{1+1}"}'}'''}"""