Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Neil Cerutti Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: "convert" string to bytes without changing data (encoding) Date: 28 Mar 2012 20:56:49 GMT Organization: Norwich University Lines: 18 Message-ID: <9thc8hFiu9U1@mid.individual.net> References: <9tg21lFmo3U1@mid.dfncis.de> <4f73504c$0$29981$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net VgimFyB0gqhgb/3PQoo9Swc9ikoylFasjTS3/rHMu5bghx230E Cancel-Lock: sha1:0fkFXcryMU0z0svJNjZb/1J8u2Q= User-Agent: slrn/0.9.9p1/mm/ao (Win32) Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:22314 On 2012-03-28, Ross Ridge wrote: > Evan Driscoll wrote: >> So yes, you can say that pretending there's not a mapping of >> strings to internal representation is silly, because there is. >> However, there's nothing you can say about that mapping. > > I'm not the one labeling anything as being silly. I'm the one > labeling the things as bullshit, and that's what you're doing > here. I can in fact say what the internal byte string > representation of strings is any given build of Python 3. Just > because I can't say what it would be in an imaginary > hypothetical implementation doesn't mean I can never say > anything about it. I am in a similar situation viz a viz my wife's undergarments. -- Neil Cerutti