On Sep 9, 2021, at 10:56, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > > On 9/9/21 9:37 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > > While I think int.to_bytes() is pretty obscure (I knew about it, forgot > > about it, and learned > > about it again!) I’m not so sure it’s any less obscure than a proposed > > bytes.fromint(). > > > > So why don’t we just relax int.to_bytes()’s signature to include natural > > default values: > > > > int.to_bytes(length=1, byteorder=sys.byteorder, *, signed=False) > > > > Then I ought to be able to just do > > > > >>> (65).to_bytes() > > b’A’ > > That seems so much worse than > > >>> bchr(65) > b'A' > > ;-)
Maybe, but given that you can *already* do the equivalent of bchr() with:
>>> (65).to_bytes(1, sys.byteorder)
b'A'
it seems like a small stretch to make that more usable, and that would outweigh
adding a difficult to understand new builtin. TOOWTDI.
In case you really want bchr():
def bchr(x):
return x.to_bytes(1, sys.byteorder)
>>> bchr(65)
b’A'
Cheers,
-Barry
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/KZOWPMF5SPOEB4PR7ZNPFVS6D5BE6WIR/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
