>>>>> "M" == M <mal at lemburg.com> writes:
M> The u"..." looks more intuitive too me. While inheriting C/C++
M> constructs usually makes sense I think usage in the C community
M> is not that wide-spread yet and for a Python freak, the small u
M> will definitely remind him of Unicode whereas the L will stand
M> for (nearly) unlimited length/precision.
I don't think I've every seen C code with L"..." strings in them.
Here's my list in no particular order.
U"..." -- reminds Java/JPython users of Unicode. Alternative
mnemonic: Unamerican-strings
L"..." -- long-strings, Lundh-strings, ...
W"..." -- wide-strings, Warsaw-strings (just trying to take credit
where credit's not due :), what-the-heck-are-these?-strings
H"..." -- happy-strings, Hammond-strings,
hey-you-just-made-my-extension-module-crash-strings
F"..." -- funky-stuff-in-these-hyar-strings
A"..." -- ain't-strings
S"..." -- strange-strings, silly-strings
M> Not that this is important, but...
Agreed.
-Barry
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