Ron Adam wrote:
> While playing around with the example bytes class I noticed code reads
> much better when I use methods called tounicode and tostring.
>
> b64ustring = b.tounicode('base64')
> b = bytes(b64ustring, 'base64')
I don't like that, because it creates a dependency
(conceptually, at least) between the bytes type and
the unicode type. And why unicode in particular?
Why should it have a tounicode() method, but not
a toint() or tofloat() or tolist() etc.?
> I'm not suggesting we start using to-type everywhere, just where it
> might make things clearer over decode and encode.
Another thing is that it only works if the codec
transforms between two different types. If you
have a bytes-to-bytes transformation, for example,
then
b2 = b1.tobytes('some-weird-encoding')
is ambiguous.
--
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+
University of Canterbury, | Carpe post meridiam! |
Christchurch, New Zealand | (I'm not a morning person.) |
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +--------------------------------------+
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
