Message124897
| Author |
loewis |
| Recipients |
Rhamphoryncus, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, doerwalter, eric.smith, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, lemburg, loewis, pitrou, rhettinger, stutzbach, vstinner |
| Date |
2010年12月30日.01:02:43 |
| SpamBayes Score |
1.3258531e-07 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<4D1BDA31.7090305@v.loewis.de> |
| In-reply-to |
<AANLkTim5kNbMFvWP4Rq56ifPvHmsonezEA9fZpmHOBwY@mail.gmail.com> |
| Content |
>> Seriously, it can wait 3.3.
>
> What exactly can wait until 3.3? The presented patch introduces no
> user visible changes. It is only a stepping stone to restoring some
> sanity in a way supplementary characters are treated by narrow builds.
> At the moment, it is a mine field: you can easily produce surrogate
> pairs from string literals and codecs, but when you start using them,
> you have 50% chance that things will blow up, 40% chance of getting
> wrong result and maybe 10% chance that it will work.
I think the proposal is that fixing this minefield can wait until
Python 3.3 (or even 3.4, or later).
I plan to propose a complete redesign of the representation of Unicode
strings, which may well make this entire set of changes obsolete.
As for language definition: I think the definition is quite clear
and unambiguous. It may be that Python 3.2 doesn't fully implement it.
IOW: relax. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2010年12月30日 01:02:46 | loewis | set | recipients:
+ loewis, lemburg, doerwalter, georg.brandl, rhettinger, amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, Rhamphoryncus, pitrou, vstinner, eric.smith, stutzbach, ezio.melotti |
| 2010年12月30日 01:02:43 | loewis | link | issue10542 messages |
| 2010年12月30日 01:02:43 | loewis | create |
|