Mahmoud Hashemi added the comment: Martin, it sounds that way because that is what is being proposed: "Merging and simplifying the two modes". Given the existence of .decode() on bytestrings, the only objects that generally need decoding in Python 2 and 3, the existence of str/unicode's second mode constitutes a design bug.
Without a doubt, Python has frequently preferred convenient idioms over EAFP. Look at dict.get for an excellent example of defaults being used instead of forcing users to catch KeyErrors. That conversation could have gone a different way, but Python is better off having stuck to its pragmatic roots. In answer to your questions, Martin, 1) I'd expect str(b"123", encoding=None) to do the same thing as str(b"123") and 2) I'd expect str(obj) behavior to continue to depend on whether the object passed is string-like. Python is a duck-typed, dynamic language, and dynamic languages are most powerful when their core types reflect usability. Consistency is one of the foremost factors of usability, and having to frequently switch between two call patterns of the str constructor feels inconsistent and unusable. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue24019> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
