[Python-Dev] email package status in 3.X

[Barry Warsaw]

On Jun 22, 2010, at 03:08 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

>Barry Warsaw writes:
>
> > Would it make sense to have "encoding-carrying" bytes and str
> > types?
>
>Why limit that to bytes and str?  Why not have all objects carry their
>serializer/deserializer around with them?

Only because the .encoding attribute isn't really a serializer/deserializer.
That's still bytes() and str() or the equivalent.  This is just a hint to a
specific serializer for parameters to that action.

>I think the answer is "no", though, because (1) it would constitute an
>attractive nuisance (the default would be abused, it would work fine
>in Kansas, and all hell would break loose in Kagoshima, simply
>delaying the pain and/or passing it on to third parties), and (2) you
>really want this under control of higher level objects that have
>access to some knowledge of the environment, rather than the lowest
>level.

I'm still not sure ebytes solves the problem, but it avoids one I'm most
concerned about seeing proposed.  I really really do not want to add
encoding=blah arguments to boatloads of function signatures.

-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20100621/dda14ec7/attachment.pgp>