This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author mark.dickinson
Recipients mark.dickinson, r.david.murray, veky
Date 2016-06-24.15:55:24
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
> I suspect that literal_eval, on the other hand, should reproduce what the interpreter does

I think that's going to be awkward to achieve without making the behaviour of literal_eval significantly less obvious and more DWIMmy. And I'm not convinced that `literal_eval` should follow the behaviour of the complex constructor rather than the behaviour of plain `eval`.

Of course, the "right" fix here is to change the complex repr entirely so that it looks like the compound object that it is rather than an eval-able expression:

>>> repr(1+2j)
complex(1.0, 2.0)

That would break backwards compatibility, but given the number of times complaints come up on this tracker, I'm beginning to think it might be worth it.
Date User Action Args
2016-06-24 15:55:24mark.dickinsonsetrecipients: + mark.dickinson, r.david.murray, veky
2016-06-24 15:55:24mark.dickinsonsetmessageid: <>
2016-06-24 15:55:24mark.dickinsonlinkissue27363 messages
2016-06-24 15:55:24mark.dickinsoncreate