On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 12:25 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> wrote: >> Index: Lib/optparse.py >> =================================================================== >> --- Lib/optparse.py (revision 68465) >> +++ Lib/optparse.py (working copy) >> @@ -994,7 +994,7 @@ >> """add_option(Option) >> add_option(opt_str, ..., kwarg=val, ...) >> """ >> - if type(args[0]) is types.StringType: >> + if type(args[0]) in types.StringTypes: >> option = self.option_class(*args, **kwargs) >> elif len(args) == 1 and not kwargs: >> option = args[0] >> >> Should this be fixed, or wait for 2.7? > > It would be a new feature. So if we apply a strict policy, it > can't be added to 2.6.
That seems a bit *too* strict to me, as long as the Unicode strings contain just ASCII. I'm fine with fixing both cases Barry mentioned, especially if it otherwise breaks "from __future__ import unicode_literals". I expect though that as one tries more things one will find more things broken with that mode. -- --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
