Travis Oliphant wrote:
> I think it would be feasible, but I'm not sure it is worth it at this
> point. My suggestion right now (and what I've done) is to back-out the
> 'w' typecode for the array module and just leave it as 'u' as before.
Thanks! I've seen that you've also checked in my typec
Dnia 13-10-2007, So o godzinie 15:38 +0200, Christian Heimes pisze:
> If I'm correct with my assumption about 'u' and 'w' your suggestion of a
> native 'U' could become in handy.
Wouldn't it be nicer if 'u' and 'U' corresponded to \u and
\U, i.e. UCS-2 and UCS-4, and something else wa
