M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > Michael Chermside wrote: >>> How about we change unicode-vs-str __eq__ to >>> issue a warning (and return False) instead of raising >>> UnicodeException? >> [... Marc-Andre Lemburg agrees ...] >>> Great! Now we need someone to volunteer to write a patch (which should >>> include doc and NEWS updates) in time for beta 3 (Aug 18). >> I don't *strongly* object to this consensus, but if you haven't >> glanced at my original example, take a look - it might convince you. >> The proposed solution will not help with my example. I'm not sure the >> motivation for breaking code like that example -- the bug-hunting >> motivation is satisfied by issuing a warning as Michael Urman proposes, >> then use an exception after one more release when people have had time >> to fix their code. > > The warning framework gives programmers great flexibility in handling > these situation: > > * they can silence the warning, just report it once, always report it > * they can have the warning raise an exception > * they can log the warning in some way > > It's very flexible to accommodate for all kinds of ways to handle > the situation. > > By introducing a new category of warning for these Unicode-related > warnings, adding specific warning filters will be easy.
This sounds like the correct tool to me. +1 Would it be possible to generate warnings when either Unicode or stings are coerced to the other implicitly but not explicitly? That may also generate a warning in the case of the dictionary problem being discussed, (I think), and may be more useful for checking for non-intentionally mixed Unicode and strings. Ron _______________________________________________ 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
