On 2006-09-01, Paul Prescod wrote: > I cannot understand why a user should be forced to choose between 16 and 32 > bit strings AT BUILD TIME.
I strongly agree. This has been troublesome for many, not just people trying to install binary libs, but also Python code that does actually need to know the difference between unicode and wide-unicode characters. Ideally, implementation work notwithstanding, I would *love* to be able to have both types at a literal level (as unicode subclasses), along with retained byte string literals. ucs2string= u'\U00010000' # 2 chars, \ud800\udc00 ucs4string= w'\U00010000' # 1 char bytestring= b'abc' string= 'abc' # byte in 2.x, ucs2 in 3.0 If these were all subclasses of basestring, and other string type subclasses could be defined taking advantage of basic string methods, that could also allow the CSI stuff you posted Matz's mention of. Although I'm personally not at all a fan of non-Unicode string types and would rather die than put i-mode emoji in a character set :-) -- And Clover mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.doxdesk.com/ _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com