4 ms·
The unicode change is net-even functionally with 2.x. Unicode everywhere is a nice goal, but let's not pretend that 2.x can't do unicode and that 3.x is the on
by trimbo 15y ago
The unicode change is net-even functionally with 2.x. Unicode everywhere is a nice goal, but let's not pretend that 2.x can't do unicode and that 3.x is the only solution.
- dagw 15y agoSure python2 can do Unicode, but it's a pain and it's far too easy to introduce bug if you're not paying attention. Unicode everywhere is probably the only python3 feature I miss with any regularity when using python2.
- maaku 15y agoNot to mention that 3.x breaks many things about strings and unicode that were perfectly fine under 2.x. Things like forcing separate codecs for str/unicode (double the work!) and the elimination of basestr (what? why?). Armin did a great article on this a while back.