Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: > Lib Ref/Built-in Types/Sequence Types/Bytes and Byte Array Methods > > The following set/frozenset and dict sections repeat (and for dicts, > expands upon) the constructor interface from the Built-in Functions > section. The sequence type sections do not. There should as least be a > reference back. "For the constructor interface, see xxx"
Right -- I need to reorganize that section a bit more, and this is on the list to do. > Similarly there is no mention here of the difference between bytes and > bytearray, as there is below for the difference between set and > frozenset. I think there should be here, in this section, even though > there is back in Built-in Functions. The difference is mentioned under the "sequence types" heading. > (Sets/frozenset have the opposite problem in that Built-in Functions > makes no mention that one is mutable and the other is not. I also think > just one word for each should be added there too.) > > "The bytes and bytearray types have an additional class method: > bytes.fromhex(string) " should be followed by > "bytearray.fromhex(string)" and > "This bytes class method returns a bytes object," changed to > "These class methods return a bytes or bytearray object," Agreed. > I don't think the line 'Example:' is needed. Yep. > A thread today on the Py3 lists again brought up the issue that just as > bytes can be created by either a literal or class call, they could be > represented on output by either, with possible confusion. > Guido responded > > Only if you didn't know that b'' is an alternative to bytes(). The b'' > > notation is so much more compact and so much more helpful that I > > really don't want to go back to it. We will somehow have to deal with > > this through education and documentation. > > I suggest adding at the end: > "Just as a bytes objects can be constructed either with a literal or a > class constructor call, they could be represented on output either by a > literal or class constructor call. The literal was chosen as being > shorter, generally more useful, and consistent with how other classes > are displayed. Similarly, the display of bytearrays uses the > corresponding bytes literal. If you want to see the bytes of either > class as integers, use tuple. > > >>> a, b = b'abc', bytes((1,2,3)) > >>> a,b > (b'abc', b'\x01\x02\x03') > >>> tuple(a), tuple(b) > ((97, 98, 99), (1, 2, 3)) > >>> c = bytearray(a) > >>> c, tuple(c) > (bytearray(b'abc'), (97, 98, 99)) > " The same section that documents the bytes/bytearray difference also already mentions this; I've amended it a bit to include the bit about representation. Committed changes as r64627. ---------- resolution: -> fixed status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3220> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
