Message213592
| Author |
josh.r |
| Recipients |
ethan.furman, josh.r, r.david.murray, serhiy.storchaka |
| Date |
2014年03月14日.21:40:16 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1394833216.59.0.221214106415.issue20895@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I would think the argument for deprecation is that usually, people type bytes(7) or bytes(somesmallintvalue) expecting to create a length one bytes object using that value (happens by accident if you iterate a bytes object and forget it's an iterable of ints, not an iterable of len 1 bytes). It's really easy to forget to make it bytes([7]) or bytes((7,)) or what have you. If you make the same mistake with str, list, tuple, etc., you get an error, because they only accept iterables. But bytes silently behaves in a way that is inconsistent with the other sequence types.
Given that b'0円' * 7 is usually faster in any event (by avoiding lookup costs to find the bytes constructor) and more intuitive to people familiar with the Python sequence idiom, I could definitely see this as a redundancy that does nothing but confuse. |
|