Develop Reference

How can I add spaces around a sub-string using Python formatted strings `(f'...')` without first creating a new variable?

Suppose, I want to convert the following .format()'ed string to a f'...' expression:
self.logger.debug('{:10} -- {}'.format('Jira', 'Scan: {} '.format(self.scan_id)))
I can do it easily as:
self.logger.debug(f'Jira -- {self.scan_id}`)
However, I don't want to add the spaces (width) around 'Jira' manually. How can I do that without first having to create a new variable as in:
s='Jira'
self.logger.debug(f'{s:10} -- {self.scan_id}`)
?

You can directly put your string in curly brackets like this:
self.logger.debug(f'{"Jira":10} -- {self.scan_id}')
Because an f-string expects an expression inside {} and a string itself is a valid expression.

You should generally avoid doing string formatting directly in logging calls as it can waste time formatting strings that are never emitted. Instead you should prefer to use the inbuilt formatting of the logger.
An example of how you might achieve your logging call would be:
logger.debug('% -10s -- %s', 'Jira', self.scan_id)
By default, the logging module uses percent formatting (documentation). If you are more familar with brace formatting (ie.using {}) and would prefer to use that, then this answer shows you how to set it up.

Can I use variables in the prompt of the python raw_input function? [duplicate]

I would like to put an int into a string. This is what I am doing at the moment:
num = 40
plot.savefig('hanning40.pdf') #problem line
I have to run the program for several different numbers, so I'd like to do a loop. But inserting the variable like this doesn't work:
plot.savefig('hanning', num, '.pdf')
How do I insert a variable into a Python string?
See also
If you tried using + to concatenate a number with a string (or between strings, etc.) and got an error message, see How can I concatenate str and int objects?.
If you are trying to assemble a URL with variable data, do not use ordinary string formatting, because it is error-prone and more difficult than necessary. Specialized tools are available. See Add params to given URL in Python.
If you are trying to assemble a SQL query, do not use ordinary string formatting, because it is a major security risk. This is the cause of "SQL injection" which costs real companies huge amounts of money every year. See for example Python: best practice and securest way to connect to MySQL and execute queries for proper techniques.
If you just want to print (output) the string, you can prepare it this way first, or if you don't need the string for anything else, print each piece of the output individually using a single call to print. See How can I print multiple things (fixed text and/or variable values) on the same line, all at once? for details on both approaches.

Using f-strings:
plot.savefig(f'hanning{num}.pdf')
This was added in 3.6 and is the new preferred way.
Using str.format():
plot.savefig('hanning{0}.pdf'.format(num))
String concatenation:
plot.savefig('hanning' + str(num) + '.pdf')
Conversion Specifier:
plot.savefig('hanning%s.pdf' % num)
Using local variable names (neat trick):
plot.savefig('hanning%(num)s.pdf' % locals())
Using string.Template:
plot.savefig(string.Template('hanning${num}.pdf').substitute(locals()))
See also:
Fancier Output Formatting - The Python Tutorial
Python 3's f-Strings: An Improved String Formatting Syntax (Guide) - RealPython

With the introduction of formatted string literals ("f-strings" for short) in Python 3.6, it is now possible to write this with a briefer syntax:
>>> name = "Fred"
>>> f"He said his name is {name}."
'He said his name is Fred.'
With the example given in the question, it would look like this
plot.savefig(f'hanning{num}.pdf')

plot.savefig('hanning(%d).pdf' % num)
The % operator, when following a string, allows you to insert values into that string via format codes (the %d in this case). For more details, see the Python documentation:
printf-style String Formatting

You can use + as the normal string concatenation function as well as str().
"hello " + str(10) + " world" == "hello 10 world"

In general, you can create strings using:
stringExample = "someString " + str(someNumber)
print(stringExample)
plot.savefig(stringExample)

If you would want to put multiple values into the string you could make use of format
nums = [1,2,3]
plot.savefig('hanning{0}{1}{2}.pdf'.format(*nums))
Would result in the string hanning123.pdf. This can be done with any array.

Special cases
Depending on why variable data is being used with strings, the general-purpose approaches may not be appropriate.
If you need to prepare an SQL query
Do not use any of the usual techniques for assembling a string. Instead, use your SQL library's functionality for parameterized queries.
A query is code, so it should not be thought about like normal text. Using the library will make sure that any inserted text is properly escaped. If any part of the query could possibly come from outside the program in any way, that is an opportunity for a malevolent user to perform SQL injection. This is widely considered one of the important computer security problems, costing real companies huge amounts of money every year and causing problems for countless customers. Even if you think you know the data is "safe", there is no real upside to using any other approach.
The syntax will depend on the library you are using and is outside the scope of this answer.
If you need to prepare a URL query string
See Add params to given URL in Python. Do not do it yourself; there is no practical reason to make your life harder.
Writing to a file
While it's possible to prepare a string ahead of time, it may be simpler and more memory efficient to just write each piece of data with a separate .write call. Of course, non-strings will still need to be converted to string before writing, which may complicate the code. There is not a one-size-fits-all answer here, but choosing badly will generally not matter very much.
If you are simply calling print
The built-in print function accepts a variable number of arguments, and can take in any object and stringify it using str. Before trying string formatting, consider whether simply passing multiple arguments will do what you want. (You can also use the sep keyword argument to control spacing between the arguments.)
# display a filename, as an example
print('hanning', num, '.pdf', sep='')
Of course, there may be other reasons why it is useful for the program to assemble a string; so by all means do so where appropriate.
It's important to note that print is a special case. The only functions that work this way are ones that are explicitly written to work this way. For ordinary functions and methods, like input, or the savefig method of Matplotlib plots, we need to prepare a string ourselves.
Concatenation
Python supports using + between two strings, but not between strings and other types. To work around this, we need to convert other values to string explicitly: 'hanning' + str(num) + '.pdf'.
Template-based approaches
Most ways to solve the problem involve having some kind of "template" string that includes "placeholders" that show where information should be added, and then using some function or method to add the missing information.
f-strings
This is the recommended approach when possible. It looks like f'hanning{num}.pdf'. The names of variables to insert appear directly in the string. It is important to note that there is not actually such a thing as an "f-string"; it's not a separate type. Instead, Python will translate the code ahead of time:
>>> def example(num):
... return f'hanning{num}.pdf'
...
>>> import dis
>>> dis.dis(example)
2 0 LOAD_CONST 1 ('hanning')
2 LOAD_FAST 0 (num)
4 FORMAT_VALUE 0
6 LOAD_CONST 2 ('.pdf')
8 BUILD_STRING 3
10 RETURN_VALUE
Because it's a special syntax, it can access opcodes that aren't used in other approaches.
str.format
This is the recommended approach when f-strings aren't possible - mainly, because the template string needs to be prepared ahead of time and filled in later. It looks like 'hanning{}.pdf'.format(num), or 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(num=num)'. Here, format is a method built in to strings, which can accept arguments either by position or keyword.
Particularly for str.format, it's useful to know that the built-in locals, globals and vars functions return dictionaries that map variable names to the contents of those variables. Thus, rather than something like '{a}{b}{c}'.format(a=a, b=b, c=c), we can use something like '{a}{b}{c}'.format(**locals()), unpacking the locals() dict.
str.format_map
This is a rare variation on .format. It looks like 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format_map({'num': num}). Rather than accepting keyword arguments, it accepts a single argument which is a mapping.
That probably doesn't sound very useful - after all, rather than 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format_map(my_dict), we could just as easily write 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(**my_dict). However, this is useful for mappings that determine values on the fly, rather than ordinary dicts. In these cases, unpacking with ** might not work, because the set of keys might not be determined ahead of time; and trying to unpack keys based on the template is unwieldy (imagine: 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(num=my_mapping[num]), with a separate argument for each placeholder).
string.Formatter
The string standard library module contains a rarely used Formatter class. Using it looks like string.Formatter().format('hanning{num}.pdf', num=num). The template string uses the same syntax again. This is obviously clunkier than just calling .format on the string; the motivation is to allow users to subclass Formatter to define a different syntax for the template string.
All of the above approaches use a common "formatting language" (although string.Formatter allows changing it); there are many other things that can be put inside the {}. Explaining how it works is beyond the scope of this answer; please consult the documentation. Do keep in mind that literal { and } characters need to be escaped by doubling them up. The syntax is presumably inspired by C#.
The % operator
This is a legacy way to solve the problem, inspired by C and C++. It has been discouraged for a long time, but is still supported. It looks like 'hanning%s.pdf' % num, for simple cases. As you'd expect, literal '%' symbols in the template need to be doubled up to escape them.
It has some issues:
It seems like the conversion specifier (the letter after the %) should match the type of whatever is being interpolated, but that's not actually the case. Instead, the value is converted to the specified type, and then to string from there. This isn't normally necessary; converting directly to string works most of the time, and converting to other types first doesn't help most of the rest of the time. So 's' is almost always used (unless you want the repr of the value, using 'r'). Despite that, the conversion specifier is a mandatory part of the syntax.
Tuples are handled specially: passing a tuple on the right-hand side is the way to provide multiple arguments. This is an ugly special case that's necessary because we aren't using function-call syntax. As a result, if you actually want to format a tuple into a single placeholder, it must be wrapped in a 1-tuple.
Other sequence types are not handled specially, and the different behaviour can be a gotcha.
string.Template
The string standard library module contains a rarely used Template class. Instances provide substitute and safe_substitute methods that work similarly to the built-in .format (safe_substitute will leave placeholders intact rather than raising an exception when the arguments don't match). This should also be considered a legacy approach to the problem.
It looks like string.Template('hanning$num.pdf').substitute(num=num), and is inspired by traditional Perl syntax. It's obviously clunkier than the .format approach, since a separate class has to be used before the method is available. Braces ({}) can be used optionally around the name of the variable, to avoid ambiguity. Similarly to the other methods, literal '$' in the template needs to be doubled up for escaping.

I had a need for an extended version of this: instead of embedding a single number in a string, I needed to generate a series of file names of the form 'file1.pdf', 'file2.pdf' etc. This is how it worked:
['file' + str(i) + '.pdf' for i in range(1,4)]

You can make dict and substitute variables in your string.
var = {"name": "Abdul Jalil", "age": 22}
temp_string = "My name is %(name)s. I am %(age)s years old." % var

Sublime Text syntax: Python 3.6 f-strings

I am trying to modify the default Python.sublime_syntax file to handle Python’s f-string literals properly. My goal is to have expressions in interpolated strings recognised as such:
f"hello {person.name if person else 'there'}"
-----------source.python----------
------string.quoted.double.block.python------
Within f-strings, ranges of text between a single { and another } (but terminating before format specifiers such as !r}, :<5}, etc—see PEP 498) should be recognised as expressions. As far as I know, that might look a little like this:
...
string:
- match: "(?<=[^\{]\{)[^\{].*)(?=(!(s|r|a))?(:.*)?\})" # I'll need a better regex
push: expressions
However, upon inspecting the build-in Python.sublime_syntax file, the string contexts especially are to unwieldy to even approach (~480 lines?) and I have no idea how to begin. Thanks heaps for any info.

There was an update to syntax highlighting in BUILD 3127 (Which includes: Significant improvements to Python syntax highlighting).
However, a couple users have stated that in BUILD 3176 syntax highlighting still is not set to correctly highlight Python expressions that are located within f strings. According to #Jollywatt, it is set to source.python f"string.quoted.double.block {constant.other.placeholder}" rather than f"string.quoted.double.block {source.python}"
It looks like Sublime uses this tool, PackageDev, "to ease the creation of snippets, syntax definitions, etc. for Sublime Text."

Why is escaping of single quotes inconsistent on file read in Python?

Given two nearly identical text files (plain text, created in MacVim), I get different results when reading them into a variable in Python. I want to know why this is and how I can produce consistent behavior.
For example, f1.txt looks like this:
This isn't a great example, but it works.
And f2.txt looks like this:
This isn't a great example, but it wasn't meant to be.
"But doesn't it demonstrate the problem?," she said.
When I read these files in, using something like the following:
f = open("f1.txt","r")
x = f.read()
I get the following when I look at the variables in the console. f1.txt:
>>> x
"This isn't a great example, but it works.\n\n"
And f2.txt:
>>> y
'This isn\'t a great example, but it wasn\'t meant to be. \n"But doesn\'t it demonstrate the problem?," she said.\n\n'
In other words, f1 comes in with only escaped newlines, while f2 also has its single quotes escaped.
repr() shows what's going on. first for f1:
>>> repr(x)
'"This isn\'t a great example, but it works.\\n\\n"'
And f2:
>>> repr(y)
'\'This isn\\\'t a great example, but it wasn\\\'t meant to be. \\n"But doesn\\\'t it demonstrate the problem?," she said.\\n\\n\''
This kind of behavior is driving me crazy. What's going on and how do I make it consistent? If it matters, I'm trying to read in plain text, manipulate it, and eventually write it out so that it shows the properly escaped characters (for pasting into Javascript code).

Python is giving you a string literal which, if you gave it back to Python, would result in the same string. This is known as the repr() (short for "representation") of the string. This may not (probably won't, in fact) match the string as it was originally specified, since there are so many ways to do that, and Python does not record anything about how it was originally specified.
It uses double quotes around your first example, which works fine because it doesn't contain any double quotes. The second string contains double quotes, so it can't use double quotes as a delimiter. Instead it uses single quotes and uses backslashes to escape the single quotes in the string (it doesn't have to escape the double quotes this way, and there are more of them than there are single quotes). This keeps the representation as short as possible.
There is no reason for this behavior to drive you crazy and no need to try to make it consistent. You only get the repr() of a string when you are peeking at values in Python's interactive mode. When you actually print or otherwise use the string, you get the string itself, not a reconstituted string literal.
If you want to get a JavaScript string literal, the easiest way is to use the json module:
import json
print json.dumps('I said, "Hello, world!"')

Both f1 and f2 contain perfectly normal, unescaped single quotes.
The fact that their repr looks different is meaningless.
There are a variety of different ways to represent the same string. For example, these are all equivalent literals:
"abc'def'ghi"
'abc\'def\'ghi'
'''abc'def'ghi'''
r"abc'def'ghi"
The repr function on a string always just generates some literal that is a valid representation of that string, but you shouldn't depend on exactly which one it generate. (In fact, you should rarely use it for anything but debugging purposes in the first place.)
Since the language doesn't define anywhere what algorithm it uses to generate a repr, it could be different for each version of each implementation.
Most of them will try to be clever, using single or double quotes to avoid as many escaped internal quotes as possible, but even that isn't guaranteed. If you really want to know the algorithm for a particular implementation and version, you pretty much have to look at the source. For example, in CPython 3.3, inside unicode_repr, it counts the number of quotes of each type; then if there are single quotes but no double quotes, it uses " instead of '.
If you want "the" representation of a string, you're out of luck, because there is no such thing. But if you want some particular representation of a string, that's no problem. You just have to know what format you want; most formats, someone's already written the code, and often it's in the standard library. You can make C literal strings, JSON-encoded strings, strings that can fit into ASCII RFC822 headers… But all of those formats have different rules from each other (and from Python literals), so you have to use the right function for the job.

Appending '0x' before the hex numbers in a string

I'm parsing a xml file in which I get basic expressions (like id*10+2). What I am trying to do is to evaluate the expression to actually get the value. To do so, I use the eval() method which works very well.
The only thing is the numbers are in fact hexadecimal numbers. The eval() method could work well if every hex number was prefixed with '0x', but I could not find a way to do it, neither could I find a similar question here. How would it be done in a clean way ?

Use the re module.
>>> import re
>>> re.sub(r'([\dA-F]+)', r'0x\1', 'id*A+2')
'id*0xA+0x2'
>>> eval(re.sub(r'([\dA-F]+)', r'0x\1', 'CAFE+BABE'))
99772
Be warned though, with an invalid input to eval, it won't work. There are also many risks of using eval.
If your hex numbers have lowercase letters, then you could use this:
>>> re.sub(r'(?<!i)([\da-fA-F]+)', r'0x\1', 'id*a+b')
'id*0xa+0xb'
This uses a negative lookbehind assertion to assure that the letter i is not before the section it is trying to convert (preventing 'id' from turning into 'i0xd'. Replace i with I if the variable is Id.

If you can parse expresion into individual numbers then I would suggest to use int function:
>>> int("CAFE", 16)
51966

Be careful with eval! Do not ever use it in untrusted inputs.
If it's just simple arithmetic, I'd use a custom parser (there are tons of examples out in the wild)... And using parser generators (flex/bison, antlr, etc.) is a skill that is useful and easily forgotten, so it could be a good chance to refresh or learn it.

One option is to use the parser module:
import parser, token, re
def hexify(ast):
if not isinstance(ast, list):
return ast
if ast[0] in (token.NAME, token.NUMBER) and re.match('[0-9a-fA-F]+$', ast[1]):
return [token.NUMBER, '0x' + ast[1]]
return map(hexify, ast)
def hexified_eval(expr, *args):
ast = parser.sequence2st(hexify(parser.expr(expr).tolist()))
return eval(ast.compile(), *args)
>>> hexified_eval('id*10 + BABE', {'id':0xcafe})
567466
This is somewhat cleaner than a regex solution in that it only attempts to replace tokens that have been positively identified as either names or numbers (and look like hex numbers). It also correctly handles more general python expressions such as id*10 + len('BABE') (it won't replace 'BABE' with '0xBABE').
OTOH, the regex solution is simpler and might cover all the cases you need to deal with anyway.