Python object.__repr__(self) should be an expression?

>>> from datetime import date
>>>
>>> repr(date.today())        # calls date.today().__repr__()
'datetime.date(2009, 1, 16)'
>>> eval(_)                   # _ is the output of the last command
datetime.date(2009, 1, 16)

The output is a string that can be parsed by the python interpreter and results in an equal object.

If that's not possible, it should return a string in the form of <...some useful description...>.

It should be a Python expression that, when eval'd, creates an object with the exact same properties as this one. For example, if you have a Fraction class that contains two integers, a numerator and denominator, your __repr__() method would look like this:

# in the definition of Fraction class
def __repr__(self):
    return "Fraction(%d, %d)" % (self.numerator, self.denominator)

Assuming that the constructor takes those two values.

Guideline: If you can succinctly provide an exact representation, format it as a Python expression (which implies that it can be both eval'd and copied directly into source code, in the right context). If providing an inexact representation, use <...> format.

There are many possible representations for any value, but the one that's most interesting for Python programmers is an expression that recreates the value. Remember that those who understand Python are the target audience—and that's also why inexact representations should include relevant context. Even the default <XXX object at 0xNNN>, while almost entirely useless, still provides type, id() (to distinguish different objects), and indication that no better representation is available.