Ezio Melotti added the comment: + str(bytes, encoding[, errors='strict']) + str(bytes, errors[, encoding='utf-8'])
Why not simply str(bytes, encoding='utf-8', errors='strict')? (Your signature suggests that str(b'abc', 'strict') should work.) + the string itself. This behavior differs from :func:`repr` in that the I'm not sure this is the right place where to explain the differences between __str__ and __repr__ (or maybe it is?). Also doesn't str() falls back on __repr__ if __str__ is missing? Does :meth:`__str__` link to object.__str__? + If *encoding* or *errors* is given, and/or + (or :class:`bytearray`) object, then :func:`str` calls I would use 'is equivalent to', rather than 'calls'. + :meth:`bytes.decode(encoding, errors) <bytes.decode>` on the object + and returns the value. Otherwise, the bytes object underlying the buffer + object is obtained before calling :meth:`bytes.decode() <bytes.decode>`. :meth:`bytes.decode` should be enough. + Passing a :func:`bytes <bytes>` :func:`bytes` should be enough (if it isn't, maybe you want :func:`.bytes`). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13538> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
