On Aug 11, 4:38 pm, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > Mind you, I'm not really vested in how Python *should* handle > backslashes one way or the other, but I am glad it has rules that it > follows for consitent results, and I don't have to break out a byte-code > editor to find out what's in my string literal.
I don't understand your comment. C++ generates a warning if you use an undefined escape sequence, which indicates that your program should be fixed. If the escape sequence isn't undefined, then C++ does the same thing as Python. It would be *even* better if C++ generated a fatal error in this situation. (g++ probably has an option to make warnings fatal, but I don't happen to know what that option is.) g++ might not generate an error so that you can compile legacy C code with it. In any case, my argument has consistently been that Python should have treated undefined escape sequences consistently as fatal errors, not as warnings. |>ouglas -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list