Gregory P. Smith added the comment: Translate isn't a text operation. (That's the api I wanted). The others I only lists for completeness because someone else would complain if I hadn't. ;) On Mar 1, 2013 12:57 PM, "Terry J. Reedy" <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> > 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 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
