Julian Taylor <jtaylor.debian <at> googlemail.com> writes: [clip] > - inconvenience in dealing with strings in python 3. > > bytes are not strings in python3 which means ascii data is either a byte > array which can be inconvenient to deal with or 4 byte unicode which > wastes space. > > A proposal to fix this would be to add a one or two byte dtype with a specific > encoding that behaves similar to bytes but converts to string when outputting > to python for comparisons etc. > > For backward compatibility we *cannot* change S. Maybe we could change > the meaning of 'a' but it would be safer to add a new dtype, possibly > 'S' can be deprecated in favor of 'B' when we have a specific encoding dtype. > > The main issue is probably: is it worth it and who does the work?
I don't think this is a good idea: the bytes vs. unicode separation in Python 3 exists for a good reason. If unicode is not needed, why not just use the bytes data type throughout the program? (Also, assuming that ASCII is in general good for text-format data is quite US-centric.) Christopher Barker wrote: > > How do you spell the dtype that 'S' give you???? > 'S' is bytes. dtype='S', dtype=bytes, and dtype=np.bytes_ are all equivalent. -- Pauli Virtanen _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
