Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #91297 > unrolled thread

Re: Fwd: Lossless bulletproof conversion to unicode (backslashing)

Started byanatoly techtonik <techtonik@gmail.com>
First post2015-05-27 14:47 +0300
Last post2015-05-27 14:47 +0300
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: Fwd: Lossless bulletproof conversion to unicode (backslashing) anatoly techtonik <techtonik@gmail.com> - 2015-05-27 14:47 +0300

#91297 — Re: Fwd: Lossless bulletproof conversion to unicode (backslashing)

Fromanatoly techtonik <techtonik@gmail.com>
Date2015-05-27 14:47 +0300
SubjectRe: Fwd: Lossless bulletproof conversion to unicode (backslashing)
Message-ID<mailman.81.1432727276.5151.python-list@python.org>
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> wrote:
> I am missing something.  Why do you need unicode at all?  Why can you
> not just keep your binary data as binary data?

Good question. From the SCons code I see that we need unicode, because
we switched to io.StringIO which is advertised as the future (and Python 3
way of doing things, because Python 3 doesn't have non-unicode StringIO).

A really deep and exhaustive answer.
advertisement (first link on StringIO vs io.StringIO):
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3410309/what-is-the-difference-between-stringio-and-io-stringio-in-python2-7
peaceful details
https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/commits/05d5af305a5d
gory consequences
https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/pull-request/235/fix-tree-all-print-when-build-tree

> I feel like I must be missing something obvious here ...

Not that obvious as it appears.
-- 
anatoly t.

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python


csiph-web