On 20 Aug 2014 04:18, "Marko Rauhamaa" <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote: > > Tres Seaver <tsea...@palladion.com>: > > > On 08/19/2014 01:43 PM, Ben Hoyt wrote: > >> Fair enough. I don't quite understand, though -- why is the "official > >> policy" to kill something that's "essential" on *nix? > > > > ISTM that the policy is based on a fantasy that "it looks like text to > > me in my use cases, so therefore it must be text for everyone." > > What I like about Python is that it allows me to write native linux code > without having to make portability compromises that plague, say, Java. I > have select.epoll(). I have os.fork(). I have socket.TCP_CORK. The > "textualization" of Python3 seems part of a conscious effort to make > Python more Java-esque.
It's not just the JVM that says text and binary APIs should be separate - it's every widely used operating system services layer except POSIX. The POSIX way works well *if* everyone reliably encodes things as UTF-8 or always uses encoding detection, but its failure mode is unfortunately silent data corruption. That said, there's a lot of Python software that is POSIX specific, where bytes paths would be the least of the barriers to porting to Windows or Jython. I'm personally +1 on consistently allowing binary paths in lower level APIs, but disallowing them in higher level explicitly cross platform abstractions like pathlib. Regards, Nick. > > > Marko > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ncoghlan%40gmail.com
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
