>>> C. File on disk with the invalid surrogate code, accessed via the str >>> interface, no decoding happens, matches in memory the file on disk with >>> the byte that translates to the same surrogate, accessed via the bytes >>> interface. Ambiguity. >> >> Is that an alternative to A and B? > > I guess it is an adjunct to case B, the current PEP. > > It is what happens when using the PEP on a system that provides both > bytes and str interfaces, and both get used.
Your formulation is a bit too stenographic to me, but please trust me that there is *no* ambiguity in the case you construct. By "accessed via the str interface", I assume you do something like fn = "some string" open(fn) You are wrong in assuming "no decoding happens", and that "matches in memory the file on disk" (whatever that means - how do I match a file on disk in memory??????). What happens instead is that fn gets *encoded* with the file system encoding, and the python-escape handler. This will *not* produce an ambiguity. If you think there is an ambiguity in that you can use both the byte interface and the string interface to access the same file: this would be a ridiculous interpretation. *Of course* you can access /etc/passwd both as "/etc/passwd" and b"/etc/passwd", there is nothing ambiguous about that. Regards, Martin _______________________________________________ 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
