Message233545
| Author |
ethan.furman |
| Recipients |
Arfrever, eric.smith, ethan.furman, martin.panter, nascheme, ncoghlan, vstinner |
| Date |
2015年01月06日.16:04:38 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1420560281.27.0.0945494323224.issue20284@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Here is what I have so far:
- complete tests for bytes and bytearry (bytearray currently commented out at line 71)
- pep461 implemented for bytes
This is basically an adaptation of the 2.7 code for str, adjusted appropriately.
I was planning on having bytearray convert to bytes, then call the bytes code, then integrate the results back into the existing bytearray (for %=) or create and return a new bytearray (for %).
I can easily believe this is not the most efficient way to do it. ;)
I should have the bytearray portion done, if not this weekend, then by the following weekend.
I have no objections if Victor wants to combine and optimize with the unicode implementation (and no need to wait for me to finish the bytearray portion). |
|