RetroSearch Browse

Fri Aug 26 13:08:54 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-August/113121.html

Antoine Pitrou, 26.08.2011 12:51:
> Why would PEP 393 apply to other implementations than CPython?

Not the PEP itself, just the implications of the result.

The question was whether the language specification in a post PEP-393 can 
(and if so, should) be changed into requiring unicode objects to be defined 
based on code points. Narrow builds, as well as Jython and IronPython, 
currently deviate from this as they use UTF-16 as their native string 
encoding, which, for one, prevents O(1) indexing into characters as well as 
a direct match between length and character count (minus combining 
characters etc.).

I think this discussion can safely be considered off-topic for this thread 
(which isn't exactly short enough to keep adding more topics to it).

Stefan

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-August/113121.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 393 Summer of Code Project