Simon Cross wrote: > If we only support one, I would prefer it to be bytes since (bytes -> > bytes -> unicode) seems like less overhead and slightly conceptually > clearer than (bytes -> unicode -> bytes), Whereas bytes -> unicode, followed if needed by unicode -> bytes, seems conceptually clearer to me. IOW, base64 is conceptually a bytes-to-text transformation, and the usual way to represent text in Python 3 is unicode. -- Greg
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