On Friday, November 21, 2014 12:06:54 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Chris Angelico : > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > >> I don't really like it how Unicode is equated with text, or even > >> character strings. > > [...] > > Do you have actual text that you're unable to represent in Unicode? > > Not my point at all. > > I'm saying equating an abstract data type (string) with its > representation (Unicode vector) is bad taste. > > > We don't call numbers IEEE, > > Exactly. > > > Do you genuinely have text that you can't represent in Unicode, or are > > you just arguing against Unicode to try to justify "Python strings are > > <something else>" as a basis for your code? > > Nobody is arguing against Unicode. I'm saying, let's talk about the > forest instead of the trees (except when the trees really are the > focus).
Ive always felt the makers of C showed remarkably good taste in the names 'int' and 'float'. Unlike: Pascal: Int and Real PL/1: Fixed and Float IOW the more leaky abstraction used for real numbers is explicitly reminded. Likewise in 2014, and given the arguments, inconsistencies, etc remembering the nuts-n-bolts below the strings-represented-as-unicode abstraction may be in order. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
