RetroSearch Browse

Sat Feb 18 17:15:14 CET 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/061372.html

M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> I've already explained why we have .encode() and .decode()
> methods on strings and Unicode many times. I've also
> explained the misunderstanding that can codecs only do
> Unicode-string conversions. And I've explained that
> the .encode() and .decode() method *do* check the return
> types of the codecs and only allow strings or Unicode
> on return (no lists, instances, tuples or anything else).
> 
> You seem to ignore this fact.

I'm not ignoring the fact that you have explained this
many times. I just fail to understand your explanations.

For example, you said at some point that codecs are not
restricted to Unicode. However, I don't recall any
explanation what the restriction *is*, if any restriction
exists. No such restriction seems to be documented.

> True. However, note that the .encode()/.decode() methods on
> strings and Unicode narrow down the possible return types.
> The corresponding .bytes methods should only allow bytes and
> Unicode.

I forgot that: what is the rationale for that restriction?

Regards,
Martin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/061372.html below:

PEP 332 revival in coordination with pep 349?]