Nick Coghlan writes:
> I also suggest introducing the phrase "ASCII compatible
> segments in binary formats" somewhere,
What is the use case for "ASCII *compatible* segments"? Can't you
just say "ASCII segments"?
I'm not sure exactly what PEP 461 says at this point, but most of the
discussion prescribes .encode('ascii', errors='strict') for implicit
interpolation of str. "ASCII compatible" is a term that people
consistently to interpret to include the bytes representation of their
data. Although the actual rule isn't terribly complex (bytes 0-127
must always have ASCII coded character semantics[1]), AFAIK there are
no use cases for that other than encoded text, ie, interpolating str,
and nobody wants that done leniently in Python 3.
Footnotes:
[1] Otherwise you need to analyze the content of data to determine
whether "ASCII-compatible" operations are safe to perform. Of course
that's possible but it was repeatedly rejected in favor of duck-typing.
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