Everything you did not want to know about Unicode in Python 3

[Rustom Mody]

On Tuesday, May 13, 2014 11:09:06 AM UTC+5:30, Mark H. Harris wrote:
> On 5/13/14 12:10 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> 
> > I think the most helpful way forward is to accept two things:
> > a. Unicode is a headache
> > b. No-unicode is a non-option
> 
> 
> QOTW    (so far...)

I said that getting unicode right straight off is unrealistic.

I should have added this:
Armin makes a (sarcastic?) dig about the fact that python (3) goofs because
its mismatched with the assumptions of unix.

| UNIX is bytes, has been defined that way and will always be that way. To 

| Unicode on UNIX is only madness if you force it on everything. But that's not 
| how Unicode on UNIX works. UNIX does not have a distinction between unicode 
| and byte APIs. They are one and the same which makes them easy to deal with.]

| Python 3 takes a very difference stance on Unicode than UNIX does. Python 3 
| says: everything is Unicode ...

This may be right...
Or it may be the other way round as I claim at 
http://blog.languager.org/2014/04/unicode-and-unix-assumption.html

At this point I dont believe that anyone is very clear what is the
right way and and wrong way