On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm still in favor of a solution that doesn't divide the APIs into > "character file names" and "byte file names"; I want the "character > file names" to work always.
I wish we could do that too, but I don't see how to make it work in all contexts. If you are passing filenames to other programs or libraries you may be forced to pass bytes, or in other cases you may be forced to give up on supporting undecodable filenames (e.g. when passing filenames to something written in Java). > However, I find it completely unrealistic > to make this work in Python 3.0. Providing that feature in 3.1 is > still early enough, plus it requires a PEP. Right. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
