RetroSearch Browse

Tue Aug 17 09:06:23 CEST 2004 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047922.html

Anthony Baxter wrote:
> Ok. Here's a case - in shtoom, I generate audio data. Lots
> of audio data. This is broken into packets, then gets a small
> header put onto each RTP packet. Right now, I'm using strings
> for this. If there was a 'byte literal', I'd use it. This isn't
> a huge problem right now, because strings are good enough. But
> if we end up in an 'all the strings are unicode', I'll need
> _some_ way to construct these packets.

Maybe you are missing the point here, maybe not: there is no
debate that Python should always have a byte string type (although
there is debate on whether that type should be mutable).

The current question is whether you want to denote objects of
the byte string type *in source code*. I.e. do you have the "Lots
of audio data" stored in .py files?

Regards,
Martin

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047922.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: adding a bytes sequence type to Python