Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20080302/3d37f586/attachment.htm below:
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 3/2/08, <b class="gmail_sendername">Christian Heimes</b> <<a href="mailto:lists@cheimes.de">lists@cheimes.de</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Alex Martelli wrote:<br> > Yep, but please do keep the PyUnicode for str and PyString for bytes<br> > (as macros/synonnyms of PyStr and PyBytes if you want!-) to help the<br> > task of porting existing extensions... the bytearray functions should<br>
> no doubt be PyBytearray, though.<br> <br> <br>Yeah, we've already planed to keep PyUnicode as prefix for str type<br> functions. It makes perfectly sense, not only from the historical point<br> of view.<br> <br>
But for PyString I planed to rename the prefix to PyBytes. In my opinion<br> we are going to regret it, when we keep too many legacy names from 2.x.<br> In order to make the migration process easier I can add a header file<br>
that provides PyString_* functions as aliases for PyBytes_*</blockquote><div><br>+1 on only doing this via a header that must be explicitly included by modules wanting the compatibility names.</div><br></div><br>
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