Ronald Oussoren writes:
> The user shouldn’t have to do anything other than install Python. IMHO
> were doing something wrong when the python interpreter doesn’t start up
> with a default system configuration
There's no evidence in the issue that I can see that suggests that the
user
On 21 Jun 2018, at 09:17, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:Ronald Oussoren writes:Possibly just for the “cp…” encodings, but IMHO only if we confirmthat the code to look for the preferred encoding returns a codepagenumber on Windows and changing that code leads to worse resultsthan adding numeric
Ronald Oussoren writes:
> Possibly just for the “cp…” encodings, but IMHO only if we confirm
> that the code to look for the preferred encoding returns a codepage
> number on Windows and changing that code leads to worse results
> than adding numeric aliases for the “cp…” encodings.
Almost
> On 18 Jun 2018, at 02:34, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> Sure, but for at least one user Python 3.6 fails to start because
>> initialising the sys.std* streams fails due to not finding a “874”
>> encoding.
>
> That doesn't mean that the bug is best fixed by adding an alias.
I agree, I’ve
> BTW. “cp874” does exist according to the unicode consortium:
https://www.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/VENDORS/MICSFT/WINDOWS/CP874.TXT,
and appears to be a codepage for a (the?) Thai language. The user might
therefore be running Windows with a Thai locale.
This page
> Sure, but for at least one user Python 3.6 fails to start because
> initialising the sys.std* streams fails due to not finding a “874”
> encoding.
That doesn't mean that the bug is best fixed by adding an alias.
If the error was failing to find encoding "ltain-1", would we add an
alias or
Folks. There are standards. "1252" *is not* an alias for
"windows-1252" according to the IANA, while "866" *is* an alias for
"IBM866" according to the same authority. Most 3-digit "IBMxxx" ARE
aliased to both "cpxxx" and just "xxx", but not all. None of
"IBM874", "874", or "cp874" exists
> It is easy to test it. Encoding/decoding with '874' should give the
> same result as with 'cp874'.
I know it is too late to remove that feature, but why do we support
digit-only IDs for encodings? They can be ambiguous. If Wikipedia is
correct, cp874 (also known as ibm874) and Windows-874
