RetroSearch Browse

Sun Mar 2 14:47:53 CET 2008 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-March/077362.html

Alex Martelli wrote:
> Yep, but please do keep the PyUnicode for str and PyString for bytes
> (as macros/synonnyms of PyStr and PyBytes if you want!-) to help the
> task of porting existing extensions... the bytearray functions should
> no doubt be PyBytearray, though.

Yeah, we've already planed to keep PyUnicode as prefix for str type
functions. It makes perfectly sense, not only from the historical point
of view.

But for PyString I planed to rename the prefix to PyBytes. In my opinion
we are going to regret it, when we keep too many legacy names from 2.x.
In order to make the migration process easier I can add a header file
that provides PyString_* functions as aliases for PyBytes_*

Comments?

Christian

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-March/077362.html below:

[Python-Dev] C-API status of Python 3?