On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 6:28 PM, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> However, in at >> least one current thread (on python-ideas) and at a variety of times >> in the past, _some_ people have found Unicode in Python 3 to make more >> work. > > If Unicode in Python is causing you more work, isn't it most likely > that the issue would have come up anyway? For instance, suppose you > have a web form and you accept customer names, which you then store in > a database. You could assume that the browser submits it in UTF-8 and > that your database back-end can accept UTF-8, and then pretend that > it's all ASCII, but if you then want to upper-case the name for a > heading, somewhere you're going to needto deal with Unicode; and when > your programming language has facilities like str.upper(), that's > going to make it easier, not later. Sure, the simple case is easier if > you pretend it's all ASCII, but it's still better to have language > facilities.
Yeah, that's how I see it too. However, my sample size is much too small to have any sense of the broader Python 3 experience. That's what I'm going for with those Python usage statistics (if it's even feasible). -eric -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
