Article on the future of Python

[Chris Angelico]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:19 PM,  <wxjmfauth at gmail.com> wrote:
> You are always selling the same argument.
> Py3.3 is the only computer language I'm aware of which
> is maltreating Unicode in such a way.

You mean, the only computer language that represents Unicode
characters as integers, and then stores them as an array of 8-bit,
16-bit, or 32-bit numbers depending on the highest codepoint? No, it's
not. I can disprove your statement with a single counterexample, but
it's entirely possible and (IMHO) likely that there are others too:

http://pike.lysator.liu.se/generated/manual/modref/ex/predef_3A_3A/String/width.html

Pike stores strings in largely the same way Python 3.3 does. Pike
strings are immutable and guaranteed to be interned, so it makes good
sense to store them as compactly as possible.

> After all, if replacing a Nabla operator in a string take
> 10 times more times in Py33 than in Python32, it takes 10
> times more . There is nothing more to say.

Comparing against a Py32 wide build, I find it hard to believe that
anything would take ten times as long. But I'll give you the benefit
of the doubt; maybe your number is in binary. I still do not expect
that it'd take twice as long. <voice imitate="Maxwell Smart">Would you
believe... barely slower?</voice> And even that's pushing it.

sigh... Why am I arguing this. I should get plonked myself for feeding
the trolls. Sorry all.

ChrisA