"M.-A. Lemburg" <mal@lemburg.com> writes: > > Can you elaborate what you think the difference is? I believe the PEP > > is silent on this specific aspect, > > It does mention this as part of phase 2. All I can find is <quote> The builtin compile() API will be enhanced to accept Unicode as input. </quote> That leaves the question open what the compile function *does* beyond merely accepting Unicode strings; it is canonical that it tries to compile it, as it would with a byte string. The unspecified aspect is the treatment of byte strings within the Unicode string. The current compiler treats them "as-is"; this is clearly no option. The reasonable options are: 1. convert to byte string using "ascii" encoding, 2. convert to byte string using "utf-8" encoding, 3. convert to byte string using system default encoding, 4. convert to byte string using encoding declared inside the code string. If that route is taken, the question is what happens if no encoding declaration is found. > No need for this. The PEP already mentions it. Can you please quote the precise words in the text of the PEP that answer the question which of the four options above is taken? Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4