On Wed, 08 Jan 2014 13:51:36 +0900
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <step...@xemacs.org> wrote:
> Benjamin Peterson writes:
>
> > I agree. This is a very important, much-requested feature for low-level
> > networking code.
>
> I hear it's much-requested, but is there any description of typical
> use cases? The ones I've seen on this list and on -ideas are
> typically stream-oriented, and seem like they would be perfectly
> well-served in terms of code readability and algorithmic accuracy by
> reading with .decode('ascii', errors='surrogateescape') and writing
> with .encode() and the same parameters (or as latin1).
It's a matter of convenience. Sometimes you're just interpolating bytes
data together and it's a bit suboptimal to have to do a
decode()-encode() dance around that.
That said, the whole issue is slightly overblown as well: network
programming in 3.x is perfectly reasonable, as the existence of Tornado
and Tulip shows.
Regards
Antoine.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
