I'm not telling you not to do this, but I already wrote a preliminary patch (well, it's not actually *working* yet, but the hard part, the grammar changes, are working ;) Of course, it may be fun to compare implementations.
On 2/23/07, Jason Orendorff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/22/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If someone would like to volunteer a small PEP on the b"..." literal I > would appreciate it. I'll do this, unless someone tells me not to. A few questions. The grammar for string literals is already changing in py3k (removing the tolerance of bogus escape sequences and the u"" prefix, I think). Is the new grammar documented anywhere? p3yk/Doc/ref/ref2.tex seems to still have the 2.x grammar, and I didn't see anything in the PEPs. How do you feel about raw byte-strings (br'a\b\c') and long byte-strings (b'''...''')? > The main concern here is that bytes objects are > mutable; I think the right semantics will be that each time a b"..." > literal is evaluated a *new* bytes object is created, just like [1, 2, > 3] constructs a new list each time it is evaluated. The alternative > would be a literal that could be modified in place, which reminds me > of the worst of Fortran. Yes, that seems clear. -j _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/thomas%40python.org
-- Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
_______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
