Travis Oliphant wrote: > I think it would be feasible, but I'm not sure it is worth it at this > point. My suggestion right now (and what I've done) is to back-out the > 'w' typecode for the array module and just leave it as 'u' as before.
Thanks! I've seen that you've also checked in my typecodes addition to arraymodule.c Do you think it's worth backporting to 2.6? The table http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3118/#additions-to-the-struct-string-syntax isn't exactly clear to me. I *guess* 'u' means UCS-2 on all platforms and builds of Python - even UCS-4 builds - and 'w' is only available on wide builds. I suggest that you place emphasis on the size to make the table unambiguous. I know that I'm nit picking but documentation should be crystal clear. ;) If I'm correct with my assumption about 'u' and 'w' your suggestion of a native 'U' could become in handy. Christian _______________________________________________ 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
