> True; and it was hard enough to get it mostly to a working > compromise. Let me add that I very much appreciate your heroic efforts there!!! > Very true indeed. Still, I think Unicode gives a chance of > "fixing" the problem we currently have with strings: Unicode > is unlike strings only usable for text data and that makes > it ideal as standard type for text -- we'll never convince > people to make a difference between text and binary data in > strings, so offering them Unicode as alternative is a good > strategy, IMHO. It's a long way before we're there though -- we'd have to overhaul the I/O system entirely, and that takes a lot of time not just because of the effort but also because it won't be fully compatible. Also, once 8-bit strings are used for binary data only, I wonder if they shouldn't be more like Java's byte arrays -- i.e. mutable. And they don't need a literal notation. That's another major language change. :-( --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