Chris Angelico writes:
> Ah, okay, so much for that, then. What about the weaker sense:
> Characters below 128 are always and only represented by those byte
> values? So if you find byte value 39, it might not actually be an
> apostrophe, but if you're looking for an apostrophe, you know for sure
> that it'll be represented by byte value 39?
1. The apostrophe that Python considers a string delimiter is always
represented by byte value 39 in the compiler input. So the only
time that wouldn't be true is if escape sequences are allowed to
represent characters. I believe unicode_escape is the only codec
that does.
2. There's always eval which will accept a string containing escape
sequences.
> Yes. I'm sure someone will come along and say "but I have to have an
> all-ASCII source file, directly runnable, with non-ASCII variable
> names", because XKCD 1172, but I don't have enough sympathy for that
> obscure situation to want the mess that unicode_escape can give.
It's not an obscure situation to me. As I wrote earlier, been there,
done that, made my own T-shirt. I don't *think* it matters today, but
the number of DOS machines and Windows 98 machines left in Japan is
not zero. Probably they can't run Python 3, but that's not something
I can testify to.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/RNCM3QNGBRRM5GW6SL3Q6FP6R55F5CHU/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
