Terry J. Reedy added the comment: I think you need to make more of a case for 'should'. Bytearrays are, well, byte arrays, not text arrays. I could just as well claim that the ascii text operations should not even be there. They are certainly not needed for typical mixed binary-ascii protocol strings, which is what bytearrars were intended for. In any case, this would fatten the api considerably for not too much benefit. I think that this, like many or most enhancement proposals, should best be discussed on python-ideas list before any tracker action.
I consider translate an exception to the above comments. It is a byte operation, not a text operations. bytearry.translate could plausibly have been defined as 'in-place' when added. Most of the other operations are special cases of translate, and can therefore be done with translate, without the limitation to only ascii chars. If one wants to directly uppercase latin-1 encoded bytes without decoding to text, one would need .translate anyway. ---------- components: +Library (Lib) -Interpreter Core nosy: +terry.reedy _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17301> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
