On 2014-05-12 19:31, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:47 AM, alister
<alister.nospam.w...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Mon, 12 May 2014 16:19:17 +0100, Mark Lawrence wrote:
This was *NOT* written by our resident unicode expert
http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2014/5/12/everything-about-unicode/
Posted as I thought it would make a rather pleasant change from
interminable threads about names vs values vs variables vs objects.
Surely those example programs are not the pythonoic way to do things or
am i missing something?
The _is_binary_reader and _is_binary_writer functions look like they
could be simplified by calling isinstance on the io object itself
against io.TextIOBase, io.BufferedIOBase or io.RawIOBase, rather than
doing those odd 0-length reads and writes. And then perhaps those
exception-swallowing try-excepts wouldn't be necessary. But perhaps
there's a non-obvious reason why it's written the way it is.
How about checking sys.stdin.mode and sys.stdout.mode?
And there appears to be a bug where everything *except* the filename
'-' is treated as stdin, so the script probably hasn't been tested at
all.
if those code samples are anything to go by this guy makes JMF look
sensible.
This is an ad hominem. Just because his code sucks doesn't mean he's
wrong about the state of Unicode and UNIX in Python 3.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
