On May 6, 2005, at 8:11 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Nicholas Bastin wrote: >> Well, this is a completely separate issue/problem. The internal >> representation is UTF-16, and should be stated as such. If the >> built-in methods actually don't work with surrogate pairs, then that >> should be fixed. > > Yes to the former, no to the latter. PEP 261 specifies what should > and shouldn't work.
This PEP has several textual errors and ambiguities (which, admittedly, may have been a necessary state given the unicode standard in 2001). However, putting that aside, I would recommend that: --enable-unicode=ucs2 be replaced with: --enable-unicode=utf16 and the docs be updated to reflect more accurately the variance of the internal storage type. I would also like the community to strongly consider standardizing on a single internal representation, but I will leave that fight for another day. -- Nick _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
