Malcolm Tredinnick wrote: > On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 10:02 +0200, Gábor Farkas wrote: >> hi, >> >> i've been reading http://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/StringEncoding, >> >> and the idea seems to be, that for "Passing Strings Between Django and >> the Developer's Code", >> >> django will/should accept both utf-8 encoded byte-strings, and >> unicode-strings. >> >> wouldn't it be simpler to only accept unicode-strings? > > Simpler on one level (inside Django), much, much harder for simple cases > for developers. > >> or in other words: in which situations is it better, to also accept >> utf-8 bytestrings? >> >> for me it seems much more clean/strict/explicit/pythonic to assume that >> all such strings are unicode. > > It's a much tougher requirement on the developer. They have to change > every piece of their code. Instead, we can accept UTF-8 bytestrings or > unicode strings and large amounts of code will work unchanged. > > There aren't actually that many places where strings go back and forth > between Django and the developers code, so doing the conversion to > Unicode, if necessary, at the Django interface isn't appearing to be > that hard. > > It doesn't seem to be that expensive, performance-wise to allow > bytestrings, so I'd like to continue to do so. We only do the conversion > once (and check once in the no-conversion-required case). >
thanks for the explanation. i still think that a pure-unicode approach would be better, but i understand the reasons why you took the current approach. in other words: thanks, i consider my question answered :) gabor --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
