Message103833
| Author |
pitrou |
| Recipients |
loewis, pitrou, vstinner |
| Date |
2010年04月21日.12:28:55 |
| SpamBayes Score |
5.8505943e-06 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1271852937.17.0.825806652857.issue8485@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Or perhaps the bytearray can be converted to a bytes object. This is not optimal performance-wise but is unlikely to make a difference in real-world code (if you are passing a filename to an external API, chances are some IO will occur which will dwarf the cost of creating a separate bytes object).
But I agree that supporting bytearrays in filename-taking functions, while "nice" from a consistency point of view, isn't really useful in practice. So I would be ok to remove that support if it simplifies (or avoids complexifying) the logic for those functions. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2010年04月21日 12:28:57 | pitrou | set | recipients:
+ pitrou, loewis, vstinner |
| 2010年04月21日 12:28:57 | pitrou | set | messageid: <1271852937.17.0.825806652857.issue8485@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2010年04月21日 12:28:55 | pitrou | link | issue8485 messages |
| 2010年04月21日 12:28:55 | pitrou | create |
|