Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #31322
| From | Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: portable unicode literals |
| Date | 2012-10-15 20:11 +0300 |
| References | <t8etk9-5h9.ln1@satorlaser.homedns.org> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.2221.1350321135.27098.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 15.10.12 16:05, Ulrich Eckhardt wrote: > I need a little nudge in the right direction, as I'm misunderstanding > something concerning string literals in Python 2 and 3. In Python 2.7, > b'' and '' are byte strings, while u'' is a unicode literal. In Python > 3.2, b'' is a byte string and '' is a unicode literal, while u'' is a > syntax error. > > This actually came as a surprise to me, I assumed that using b'' I could > portably create a byte string (which is true) and using u'' I could > portably create a unicode string (which is not true). This feature would > help porting code between both versions. While this is a state I can > live with, I wonder what the rationale for this is. from __future__ import unicode_literals And now you can portable use b'' for a byte string and '' for a unicode string. When you will drop Python 2 support then just remove import from __future__.
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
portable unicode literals Ulrich Eckhardt <ulrich.eckhardt@dominolaser.com> - 2012-10-15 15:05 +0200
Re: portable unicode literals Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-10-15 13:26 +0000
Re: portable unicode literals Dave Angel <d@davea.name> - 2012-10-15 09:32 -0400
Re: portable unicode literals Alex Strickland <sscc@mweb.co.za> - 2012-10-15 15:41 +0200
Re: portable unicode literals Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2012-10-16 08:44 +0000
Re: portable unicode literals Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2012-10-15 20:11 +0300
csiph-web