> On Dec 16, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > > I am beginning to think that `from __future__ import unicode_literals` does > more harm than good. I don't recall exactly why we introduced it, but with > the restoration of u"" literals in Python 3.3 we have a much better story for > writing straddling code that is unicode-correct. > > The problem is that the future import does both too much and not enough -- it > does too much because it changes literals to unicode even in contexts where > there is no benefit (e.g. the argument to getattr() -- I still hear of code > that breaks due to this occasionally) and at the same time it doesn't do > anything for strings that you read from files, receive from the network, or > even from other files that don't use the future import. > > I wonder if we can add an official note to the 2.7 docs recommending against > it? (And maybe even to the 3.x docs if it's mentioned there at all.)
+1 Leaving it in place will likely cause more problems than it solves, so I think your suggest is a net win even if there is some bit of disruption. Also, as far as I can tell, the adoption rate of Python 3.2 was very low. Python 3's story didn't become attractive until later. Raymond _______________________________________________ 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
