Guido> Anyway, if we really do have enough use cases for byte array
Guido> literals, we might add them. I still think that would be
Guido> confusing though, because byte arrays are most useful if they are
Guido> mutable: and then we'd have mutable literals -- blechhhh!
Today I can initialize mutable objects from immutable strings:
>>> print list("abc")
['a', 'b', 'c']
>>> print set("abc")
set(['a', 'c', 'b'])
I see no reason that mutable bytes objects couldn't be created from
otherwise immutable sequences either. Would it be a problem to ensure that
a = b"abc"
b = b"abc"
print a is b
prints False?
The main difference as I see it is that byte literals would be completely
devoid of any sort of interpretation as unicode sequences. It would be nice
if this was possible:
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
b = b"รข"
though that would probably wreak havoc with editors and hex escapes would
have to be used in most situations.
Skip
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