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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #82569

Re: Portable code: ‘from __future__ import unicode_literals’ a good idea?

Show key headers only | View raw

On 12/15/14 7:42 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> As for the advice to avoid such a declaration, you're arguing against
> the official guide for porting Python 2 code to 2-and-3 compatible code:
>
>      For text you should either use the from __future__ import
>      unicode_literals statement or add a u prefix to the text literal.
>
>      <URL:https://docs.python.org/3.4/howto/pyporting.html#text-versus-binary-data>
>
> So, the declarative import is specifically recommended. You'll need to
> present a case for why I shouldn't follow that recommendation.

What's wrong with this part of the recommendation?: "or add a u prefix 
to the text literal."

Also, keep in mind, these recommendations are not infallible.  They are 
sometimes written before there's been broad experience with the 
solution.  Your use of __import__ puts you in a tiny minority of 
programs, so the recommendation that's good for 99% of code may not work 
for you.

Be flexible.  Do what works.

-- 
Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Portable code: ‘from __future__ import unicode_literals’ a good idea? Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-12-15 20:19 -0500
  Re: Portable code: 'from __future__ import unicode_literals' a good idea? wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-12-16 00:19 -0800

csiph-web