On Tue, Aug 19, 2014, at 10:43, Ben Hoyt wrote: > >> > The official policy is that we want them [support for bytes paths in stdlib functions] to go away, but reality so far has not budged. We will continue to hold our breath though. :-) > >> > >> Does that mean that new APIs should explicitly not support bytes? I'm > >> thinking of os.scandir() (PEP 471), which I'm implementing at the > >> moment. I was originally going to make it support bytes so it was > >> compatible with listdir, but maybe that's a bad idea. Bytes paths are > >> essentially broken on Windows. > > > > Bytes paths are "essential" on Unix, though, so I don't think we should > > create new low-level APIs that don't support bytes. > > Fair enough. I don't quite understand, though -- why is the "official > policy" to kill something that's "essential" on *nix? Well, notice the official policy is desperately *wanting* them to go away with the implication that we grudgingly bow to reality. :)
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