Paul Prescod wrote:
>
> On wide Python builds there is no such thing as variable width Unicode
> characters. It doesn't make sense to combine two 32-bit characters to
> get a 64-bit one. On narrow Python builds you might want to treat a
> surrogate pair as a single character but I would strongly advise against
> it. If you want wide characters, move to a wide build. Even if a narrow
> build is more space efficient, you'll lose a ton of performance
> emulating wide characters in Python code.
This needn't go into the PEP, I think, but I'd like you to say something
about what you expect the end result of this PEP to look like under
Windows, where "rebuild" isn't really a valid option for most Python
users. Are we simply committing to make two builds available? If so,
what happens the next time we run into a situation like this?
--
--- Aahz (@pobox.com)
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 <*> http://www.rahul.net/aahz/
Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista
I don't really mind a person having the last whine, but I do mind someone
else having the last self-righteous whine.
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