I've tried a bit PR 13455, I find this way nicer than textwrap.dedent(...),
though I wonder if f-string readability (and expected behavior?) might suffer a tiny bit with the order of formatting the f-string vs dedenting.
In the following it is clear that dedent is after formatting:
>>> dedent(f" {stuff}")
It might be unclear for the following especially if `.dedent()` get sold as zero-overhead at compile time.
>>> f" {stuff}".dedent()
Could it be made clearer with the peephole optimiser (and tested, I don't believe it is now), that dedent applies after-formatting ?
Alternative modifications/suggestions/notes:
- I can also see how having dedent applied **before** formatting with f-string could be useful or less surprising ( a d"" prefix could do that... just wondering what your actual goal is).
- Is this a supposed to deprecating textwrap.dedent ? Duck-typing and stuff, could textwrap.dedent work on non-str things and the current implementation not ( it assumes the `.dedent()` method exists) and thus be backward-incompatible ?