Guido van Rossum wrote: > This could just as well be done using a method on that specific > object. I don't think having to write x.as_bytes() is worse than > bytes(x), *unless* there are contexts where it's important to convert > something to bytes without knowing what kind of thing it is. For > str(), such a context exists: print(). For bytes(), I'm not so sure. > The use cases given here seem to be either very specific to a certain > class, or could be solved using other generic APIs like pickling.
I see your point. Since nobody else beside Victor and me are interested in __bytes__ I retract my proposal. Thanks for your time. Christian _______________________________________________ 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
