Fernando Perez <fdo.pe...@gmail.com> added the comment: On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:52, Alexander Belopolsky <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > Why do you expect shlex to work with unicode in 2.x? =A0The > documentation clearly says that the argument should be a string. > Supporting unicode is not an unreasonable RFE, but won't be considered > for 2.x anymore.
Well, I didn't make the original report, just provided a short, illustrative example :) It's easy enough to work around the issue for 2.x that I don't care too much about it, so I have no problem with 2.x staying as it is. > What's your take on accepting bytes in 3.x? Mmh... Not too sure. I'd think about it from the perspective of what possible sources of input could produce raw bytes, that would be reasonable use cases for shlex. Is it common in 3.x to read a file in bytes mode? If so, then it might be a good reason to have shlex parse bytes as well, since I can imagine reading inputs from files to be parsed via shlex. But take my opinion on 3.x with a big grain of salt, I have very little experience with it as of yet. Cheers, f ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1170> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
