Wiadomość napisana przez Stefan Behnel w dniu 2011-05-19, o godz. 10:37: >> But why wouldn't "they" expect `b'de' + 1` to work as well in this case? If >> a 1-byte bytes is equivalent to an integer, why not an arbitrary one as well? > > The result of this must obviously be b"de1".
I hope you're joking. At best, the result should be b"de\x01". But I don't think such construct should be allowed. Just like you can't do `[1, 2, 3] + 4`. I wouldn't ever expect that a single byte behaves like a sequence of bytes. In the case of bytes b'a' is obviously still a sequence of bytes, just happening to store a single one. Indexing should return a byte so I'm not surprised it returns a number. Slicing on the other hand returns a sub-sequence. However inconvenient, I find the current behaviour logical and predictable. A shortcut for b'a'[0] would obviously be nice but that's for python-ideas. -- Best regards, Łukasz Langa Senior Systems Architecture Engineer IT Infrastructure Department Grupa Allegro Sp. z o.o. _______________________________________________ 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
