On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 07:45:57 +0200, Martin v. Löwis wrote: >>> Now, you seem to talk about different *Linux* systems. On Linux, >>> use UCS-4. >> >> Yes, that's what we want. But Python 2.5 defaults to UCS-2 (at least >> last time I tried), while many distros have used UCS-4. If Linux >> always used UCS-4, that would be fine, but currently there's no >> guarantee of that. > > I see why a guarantee would help, but I don't think it's necessary. > Just provide UCS-4 binaries only on Linux, and when somebody complains, > tell them to recompile Python, or to recompile your software themselves.
Won't recompiling Python break every other Python program on their system, though? (e.g. anything that itself uses a C Python library) Also, anything involving recompiling isn't exactly user friendly... we might give Linux a bad name! > The defaults in 2.5.x cannot be changed anymore. The defaults could > be changed for Linux in 2.6, but then the question is: why just for > Linux? Are there different Windows python binaries around with different UCS-2/4 settings? If so, I'd imaging that would be a problem too, although as I say we don't have many Windows users for ROX. BTW, none of this is urgent. We experimented with Python/C hybrids in the past. It didn't work, so we carried on using pure C programs for anything that needed any part in C. So it's not causing actual problems for users right now. It would just be nice to have it sorted out one day, so we could use Python more in the future. -- Dr Thomas Leonard http://rox.sourceforge.net GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6 8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1 _______________________________________________ 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
