Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[Python-Dev] PEP 414 - Unicode Literals for Python 3

R. David Murrayrdmurray at bitdance.com
Mon Feb 27 21:11:34 CET 2012


On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 10:17:57 -0800, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:> > The best argument is that there already exists tons and tons of Python 2> > code that already does:> >> >  u'that'>> +1>> > Needing to change it to:> >> >  u('that')> >> > 1) Requires effort on the part of a from-Python-2-porter to service> >   the aesthetic and populist goal of not having an explicit> >   but redundant-under-Py3 literal syntax that says "this is text".> >> > 2) Won't actually meet the aesthetic goal, as> >   it's uglier and slower under *both* Python 2 and Python 3.> >> > So the populist argument remains.. "it's too confusing for people who> > learn Python 3 as a new language to have a redundant syntax".  But we've> > had such a syntax in Python 2 for years with b'', and, as mentioned by> > Armin's PEP single-quoted vs. triple-quoted strings forever.> >> > I just don't understand the pushback here at all.  This is such a> > nobrainer.It's obviously not a *no*-brainer or you wouldn't be getting pushback :)I view most of the pushback as people wanting to make sure all theoptions have been carefully considered.  This should all be documentedin the PEP.> I agree. Just let's start deprecating it too, so that once Python 2.x> compatibility is no longer relevant we can eventually stop supporting> it (though that may have to wait until Python 4...). We need to send> *some* sort of signal that this is a compatibility hack and that no> new code should use it. Maybe a SilentDeprecationWarning?Isn't that what PendingDeprecationWarning is?  This seems like the kindof use case that was introduced for (though it is less used now thatDeprecationWarnings are silent by default).--David


More information about the Python-Devmailing list

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp