On 23 May 2017 at 16:20, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Taking that approach of just defining a helper API and expecting build > backends to either use it or emulate it gives us some quite attractive > properties:
Making the output data part of a structured API (and by implication, saying that backends shouldn't be writing to stdout directly at all) would definitely improve the situation, IMO. Frankly, it seems likely that the only real way we're going to get backend developers to consider encodings is by having the "build output" as a string value passed back via the API, rather than implied in the fact that backends can write to stdout/err. It also squarely places the responsibility for dealing with the question of displaying full-range Unicode output to the user onto the frontend. However, it's a relatively big change to the PEP and there's a risk that by endlessly reaching for perfection, we miss the chance to get the PEP in at all (another lesson we should probably learn from PEP 426!) Paul _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
