On Dec 5, 2007 12:54 PM, Gary Herron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > The asyncore and asynchat modules are in a difficult position when it > > comes to Python 3000. None of the core developers use it or > > particularly care about it (AFAIK), and the API has problems because > > it wasn't written to deal with bytes vs. unicode. E.g. in > > http://bugs.python.org/issue1067, Thomas suggests that these modules > > need to be rewritten to use bytes internally and have separate APIs to > > handle (unicode) text as desired, similar to the way file I/O was > > redesigned. Another alternative would be to make these modules deal > > strictly in bytes, but that would probably vastly reduce their > > usefulness (though I don't know -- as I said, I don't use them).
> I use asyncore/asynchat in one (proprietary) project of mine. However, > since the only thing I use them for is bytes, your suggested alternative > (of bytes instead of strings) is fine with me, and seems the most > natural choice. > > (In fact what I'm currently passing around is strings produced by > cPickle, but I'm assuming that the Python3 version of cPickle will > create/consume bytes. True?) Right. Although it'll just be "pickle" -- if there's a C accelerator, it'll be hidden from view, so you won't have to change the imported name to get it. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
