Jason Orendorff schrieb: > On 2/23/07, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 2/21/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Patch anyone? >> >> See attachement. It's preliminary -- it just calls the global name 'bytes' >> currently (and not even using the 'right' AST concretion mechanism) which >> means you can override what the bytes literal creates by assigning to >> 'bytes' (although I'm sure there's people out there that would love to keep >> it that way ;-P) It should probably get its own bytecode (no pun intended.) > > Cool! I finished writing up the PEP about the same time I got this, > but the PEP isn't executable. :) I would attach it, but I have a > feeling the PEP is probably unnecessary at this point...?
Not really - I wrote one for the print function too, when most of the semantics were already fixed - but I think this could be added to the existing bytes PEP, as a new section. Georg _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
