On 2006-09-01, Paul Prescod wrote:
> I cannot understand why a user should be forced to choose between 16 and 32
> bit strings AT BUILD TIME.
I strongly agree. This has been troublesome for many, not just people
trying to install binary libs, but also Python code that does actually
need to know
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> I recently emerged in several packages.
good thing dictionary.com includes wikipedia articles, or I'd never figured out
if that was a typo or a rather odd spiritual phenomenon.
___
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.
On Sep 1, 2006, at 2:49 AM, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>> I think it would be best to do this as a CPython configuration option
>> just like it's done today. You can choose 4-byte or 2-byte Unicode
>> (essentially UCS-4 or UTF-16) in order to be compatible with other
>> pack
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I think it would be best to do this as a CPython configuration option
> just like it's done today. You can choose 4-byte or 2-byte Unicode
> (essentially UCS-4 or UTF-16) in order to be compatible with other
> packages on the platform. Yes, 4-byte gives better Unicode sup
On 8/31/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/31/06, Paul Prescod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> On 8/31/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > (Adding back py3k list assuming you just forgot it)
>> Yes, thanks. Gmail's UI really optimizes the "Reply To" operation of "Reply>
On 8/31/06, Paul Prescod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/31/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (Adding back py3k list assuming you just forgot it)
>
> Yes, thanks. Gmail's UI really optimizes the "Reply To" operation of "Reply
> To All."
>
> > > Plus, it sounds like you're propos
On 8/31/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(Adding back py3k list assuming you just forgot it)Yes, thanks. Gmail's UI really optimizes the "Reply To" operation of "Reply To All."
> Plus, it sounds like you're proposing that the encodings of the underlying> data would leak through to
