Le 25/06/2014 19:28, Nick Coghlan a écrit : > > OK, *that* sounds like an excellent reason to keep the Unicode disabled > builds functional, and make sure they stay that way with a buildbot: to > help make sure we're not accidentally running afoul of the implicit > interoperability between str and unicode when backporting fixes from > Python 3. > > Helping to ensure correct handling of str values makes this capability > something of benefit to *all* Python 2 users, not just those that turn > off the Unicode support. It also makes it a potentially useful testing > tool when assessing str/unicode handling in general. Hmmm... From my perspective, trying to enforce unicode-disabled builds will only lower the (already low) chance that I may want to write / backport bug fixes for 2.7. For the same reason, I agree with Victor that we should ditch the threading-disabled builds. It's too much of a hassle for no actual, practical benefit. People who want a threadless unicodeless Python can install Python 1.5.2 for all I care. Regards Antoine.
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