On 3/23/07, Jason Orendorff <jason.orendorff at gmail.com> wrote: > Scheme is adding Unicode support in an upcoming standard: > (DRAFT) http://www.r6rs.org/document/lib-html/r6rs-lib-Z-H-3.html > > I have two questions for the python-dev team about Python's Unicode > experiences. If it's convenient, please take a moment to reply. > Thanks in advance. > > 1. In hindsight, what do you think about PEP 261, the Py_UNICODE_WIDE > build option? On balance, has this been good, bad, or indifferent? > What's good/bad about it? Don't ask me, I've never thought about it. > 2. The idea of multiple string representations has come up (that is, > where all strings are Unicode, but in memory some are 8-bit, some > 16-bit, and some 32-bit--each string uses the narrowest possible > representation). This has been discussed here for Python 3000. My > question is: Is this for real? How far along is it? How likely is > it? Unlikely to happen at this point; nobody's stepped up to implement this, and the implementation effort would be *huuuuge* -- on top of the already *huuge* effort of unifying str and unicode. (And no, it would not make that effort any easier.) -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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