On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Mark Lawrence <breamore...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On 15/07/2014 18:38, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >> >> Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Fine. Tell me how you would go about adding true Unicode support to >>> Python 2.7, while still having it able to import an unchanged program. >>> Trick question - it's fundamentally impossible, because an unchanged >>> program will not distinguish between bytes and text, but true Unicode >>> support requires that they be distinguished. >> >> >> Python 2 has always had unicode strings and [byte] strings. They were >> always clearly distinguished. You really didn't have to change anything >> for "true Unicode support". >> > > That is the funniest tongue in cheek comment I've read in the 10+ years > I''ve been hanging around here. It was tongue in cheek, wasn't it?
What isn't "true" about Python 2.x's unicode support? The only feature I ever missed was case folding. (Not that 3.x does much better at that... :) The stdlib had poor unicode support, if that's what you mean. That could've been fixed without introducing backwards-incompatible changes, though. -- Devin -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
