On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org> wrote: > > > I am very worried about this long and rambling PEP, >
FWIW, I read the PEP on the bus this morning on a phone, and while lng, I didn't find it too rambling. And this topic has been very often discussed in very long and rambling mailing list threads, etc. So I think a long (If not rambling) PEP is in order. This is a very important topic for Python -- the py2-3 transition got a LOT of flack, to the point of people claiming that it was easier to learn a whole new language than convert to py3 -- and THIS particular issue was a big part of it: The truth is that any system that does not use a clearly defined encoding for filenames (and everything else) is broken, plain and simple. But the other truth is (as talked about in the PEP) they some *nix systems are that broken because C code that simply passed around char* still works fine. And no matter how you slice it telling people that they need to fix their broken system in order for your software to run is not a popular option. When Python added surrogateescape to its Unicode implementation, the tools were there to work with broken (OK, I'll be charitable: misconfigured) systems. Now we just need some easier defaults. OK, now I'm getting long and rambling.... TL;DR -- The proposal in the PEP is an important step forward, and the issue is fraught with enough history and controversy that a long PEP is probably a good idea. So the addition of a better summary of the specification up at the top, and editing of the rest, and we could have a good PEP. Too late for this release, but what can you do? > The "Unicode just works" summary is more a wish than a proper summary of > the PEP. > well, yeah. > FWIW the relationship with PEP 538 is also pretty unclear. (Or maybe > that's another case of the forest and the trees.) And that PEP (while > already accepted) also comes across as rambling and vague, and I have no > idea what it actually does. And it seems to mention PEP 540 quite a few > times. > I just took another look at 538 -- and yes, the relationship between the two is really unclear. In particular, with 538, why do we need 540? I honestly don't know. -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception chris.bar...@noaa.gov
_______________________________________________ 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