On 14/08/10 22:49, Phil Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 22:41:07 +0100, Baz Walter<[email protected]> wrote:
On 14/08/10 16:29, Phil Thompson wrote:
I may make it more restrictive (ie. more correct, but maybe at the cost
of
breaking code) by requiring bytes objects (for Python3) and str objects
(for Python2), and no longer allowing str objects (for Python3) and
unicode
objects (for Python2).
fwiw, this sounds fine to me - i have always done things that way as it
seems the most pythonic (EIBTI and all that).
just to be clear, though: if you did this, it would still be possible to
pass a bytearray to the scintilla apis that /retrieve/ text, right?
Can you give me a specific example?
not sure how specific you meant, but most of my usage involves code like:
result = bytearray(end - start)
self.SendScintilla(MESSAGE, start, end, result)
where MESSAGE can be any of SCI_GETTEXTRANGE, SCI_GETSELTEXT,
SCI_GETSTYLEDTEXT, etc.
the code would then go on to use the bytearray directly and/or decode to
a unicode object.
from a python point of view, i suppose it might be nicer if those apis
returned a tuple of (length, bytes) rather than modifying the argument.
_______________________________________________
QScintilla mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/qscintilla
