"M.-A. Lemburg" <m...@egenix.com> writes: > Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > I really don't want to have to tell people "Oh, that bug is fixed > > but you have to use regex instead of re" and then a few years later > > have to tell them "Oh, we're deprecating regex, you should just use > > re". > > No, you tell them: "If you want Unicode 6 semantics, use regex, if > you're fine with Unicode 2.0/3.0 semantics, use re". What do we say, then, to those who are unaware of the different semantics between those versions of Unicode, and want regular expression to “just work” in Python? To which document can we direct them to understand what semantics they want? > After all, it's not like re suddenly stopped working :-) For some value of “working”, that is. The trick is to know whether that value is what one wants. -- \ “The fact of your own existence is the most astonishing fact | `\ you'll ever have to confront. Don't dare ever see your life as | _o__) boring, monotonous, or joyless.” —Richard Dawkins, 2010-03-10 | Ben Finney _______________________________________________ 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
