[Python-Dev] New Py_UNICODE doc
Nicholas Bastin
nbastin at opnet.com
Sat May 7 22:09:26 CEST 2005
On May 7, 2005, at 9:24 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Nicholas Bastin wrote:
>> Yes, but the important question here is why would we want that? Why
>> doesn't Python just have *one* internal representation of a Unicode
>> character? Having more than one possible definition just creates
>> problems, and provides no value.
>
> It does provide value, there are good reasons for each setting. Which
> of the two alternatives do you consider useless?
I don't consider either alternative useless (well, I consider UCS-2 to
be largely useless in the general case, but as we've already discussed
here, Python isn't really UCS-2). However, I would be a lot happier if
we just chose *one*, and all Python's used that one. This would make
extension module distribution a lot easier.
I'd prefer UTF-16, but I would be perfectly happy with UCS-4.
--
Nick
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list