On 16-07-18 16:24, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Antoon Pardon <antoon.par...@vub.be>:
>
>> I really don't understand why the author of that article didn't just
>> copy his python2 program but used sys.stdin.buffer and
>> sys.sydout.buffer instead of plain sys.stdin and stdout.
> Yes, it would be nice if you could simply restrict yourself to bytes
> everywhere when your application needed it. Unfortunately, quite many
> facilities demand text, and you will need to ponder carefully at each
> such place how you deal with encoding/decoding exceptions.
And in what way is the python3 string type part of the problem with that?
I don't really understand your point here. You refered to an article
where someone seemed to be having trouble because he used a text-interface
while he wanted to treat things as bytes and this would somehow show
how python3 unicode was trouble some.
So I remarked that the problem IMO was using the wrong interface and now
you come with a different kind of situation, but I still don't see python3
big string problems being illustrated.
> Plus the bytes syntax is really ugly. I wish Python3 had reserved '...'
> for byte strings and "..." for UTF-32 strings.
>
> And just look at this:
>
> AUTH_REQ = base64.b64encode(
> ("\0{}\0{}".format(USERNAME, PASSWORD)).encode("latin1")).decode(
> "latin1")
>
> versus (Python2):
>
> AUTH_REQ = "\0{}\0{}".format(USERNAME, PASSWORD).encode("base64")
Well this may be somewhat annoying but it hardly seems to illustrate a big
problem.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
