Steve Majewski wrote: > [...] it's more clear > if I think of it as a preprocessor that really doesn't add any > capabilities to the language. I should think of it more like > the 'r' string prefix, which is just a syntactic convenience, > rather than like the 'u' string prefix, which creates a special > kind of (unicode) string. ( Well, it *does* create a special kind > of string in the runtime, but you can't access that string to > to do anything strange in Python, because as soon as it's assigned, > it gets transformed into a 'normal string' . Thinking of it as > a preprocessor makes that more obvious.) Yep, I agree, and I'm glad we're all at least seeing PEP 215 the same way now. :-) However, I don't think it would need a special kind of string in the runtime. Thinking of it as a preprocessor, I believe it would only need to generate some Python bytecode that uses the existing str or unicode types. Now I can go back to being neutral on PEP 215. :-) ## Jason Orendorff http://www.jorendorff.com/
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