On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 14:12:42 +0100, Gilles Ganault wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 17:39:00 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Can you first please report what happened when you add the print
>>statement?
>
> Thanks guys, I found how to handle this:
>
> ===========
> for id in rows:
> #Says Unicode, but it's actually not
> #print type(id[1])
> #<type 'unicode'>
If it says `unicode` *it is* `unicode`.
> try:
> print id[1];
> except UnicodeEncodeError:
> print "Not unicode"
But it *is* `unicode` if `type()` says so!
Your code still fails when ``id[1]`` can't be encoded in `sys.encoding`,
'iso8859-15', or 'cp1252'. Even worse: The output may be even encoded in
different encodings this way. That's garbage you can't decode properly
with one encoding anymore.
A clean solution would be just one ``print`` with a call of `encode()`
and an explicit encoding. I'd use 'utf-8' as default but give the user
of the program a possibility to make another choice.
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
