Larry Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But I'm open > to suggestions, on this or any other aspect of the patch.
As Martin, I, and others have suggested, direct the patch towards Python 3.x unicode text. Also, don't be surprised if Guido says no... http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2006-August/003334.html In that message he talks about why view+string or string+view or view+view should return strings. Some are not quite applicable in this case because with your implementation all additions can return a 'view'. However, he also states the following with regards to strings vs. views (an earlier variant of the "lazy strings" you propose), "Because they can have such different performance and memory usage characteristics, it's not right to treat them as the same type." - GvR This suggests (at least to me) that unifying the 'lazy string' with the 2.x string is basically out of the question, which brings me back to my earlier suggestion; make it into a wrapper that could be used with 3.x bytes, 3.x text, and perhaps others. - Josiah _______________________________________________ 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
