RetroSearch Browse

Tue Apr 28 18:49:23 CEST 2009 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-April/089142.html

> It does solve this issue, because (unlike e.g. U+F01FF) '\udcff' is
> not a valid Unicode character (not a character at all, really) and the
> only way you can put this in a POSIX filename is if you use a very
> lenient  UTF-8 encoder that gives you b'\xed\xb3\xbf'.
> 
> Since this byte sequence doesn't represent a valid character when
> decoded with UTF-8, it should simply be considered an invalid UTF-8
> sequence of three bytes and decoded to '\udced\udcb3\udcbf' (*not*
> '\udcff').
> 
> Martin: maybe the PEP should say this explicitly?

Sure, will do.

Regards,
Martin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-April/089142.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 383: Non-decodable Bytes in System Character Interfaces