Le lundi 03 octobre 2005 à 14:02 -0700, Guido van Rossum a écrit : > On 10/3/05, Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Could the "bytes" type be just the same as the current "str" type but > > without the implicit unicode conversion ? Or am I missing some desired > > functionality ? > > No. It will be a mutable array of bytes. It will intentionally > resemble strings as little as possible. There won't be a literal for > it.
Thinking about it, it may have to offer the search and replace facilities offered by strings (including regular expressions). Here is an use case : say I'm reading an HTML file (or receiving it over the network). Since the character encoding can be specified in the HTML file itself (in the <head>...</head>), I must first receive it as a bytes object. But then I must fetch the encoding information from the HTML header: therefore I must use some string ops on the bytes object to parse this information. Only after I have discovered the encoding, can I finally convert the bytes object to a text string. Or would there be another way to do it? _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
