Am 26.02.2012 07:06, schrieb Nick Coghlan: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: >> A small quibble: I'd like to see a benchmark of a 'u' function implemented >> in C. > > Even if it was quite fast, I don't think such a function would bring > the same benefits as restoring support for u'' literals.
You claim that, but your argument doesn't actually support that claim (or I fail to see the argument). > > Using myself as an example, my work projects (such as PulpDist [1]) > are currently written to target Python 2.6, since that's the system > Python on RHEL 6. As a web application, PulpDist has unicode literals > *everywhere*, but (as Armin pointed out to me), turning on "from > __future__ import unicode_literals" in every file would be incorrect, Right. So you shouldn't use the __future__ import, but the u() function. > IIRC, I've previously opposed the restoration of unicode literals as a > retrograde step. Looking at the implications for the future migration > of PulpDist has changed my mind. Did you try to follow the path of the u() function? Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ 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
