"Jeffrey Yasskin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > But we already went over this. There are over 40K letters in Unicode.
> > > It
On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But we already went over this. There are over 40K letters in Unicode.
> > It simply makes no sense to have a string.letters approachi
On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Today, string.letters works most easily with ASCII supersets, and is
> > > effectively limited to 8-bit encodings. Once everythi
On 4/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Today, string.letters works most easily with ASCII supersets, and is
> > effectively limited to 8-bit encodings. Once everything is unicode, I
> > don't think that 8-bit restriction sho
On 4/18/07, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Is anyone available to write up a PEP on how to turn super into a
> > keyword? Inside regular and class methods, super.foo(args) should be
> > equivalent to super(ThisClass, self).foo(args).
>
> As I'm still not convinc
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Is anyone available to write up a PEP on how to turn super into a
> keyword? Inside regular and class methods, super.foo(args) should be
> equivalent to super(ThisClass, self).foo(args).
As I'm still not convinced that super() is very
useful in the first place, I'm not su
On 4/18/07, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christian Heimes wrote:
>
> > What do you think about replacing the definitions by information from
> > the unicode character properties database.
>
> I'm not sure I like the idea of pulling a rather large
> database into the basic string module.
Christian Heimes wrote:
> What do you think about replacing the definitions by information from
> the unicode character properties database.
I'm not sure I like the idea of pulling a rather large
database into the basic string module.
Also, even in a unicode world, it can be useful to
deal just
On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is anyone available to write up a PEP on how to turn super into a
> > keyword? Inside regular and class methods, super.foo(args) should be
> > equivalent to super(ThisClass, self).foo(arg
On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 4/17/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > The locale module doesn't deal with Unicode, only with 8-bit charac
On 4/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is anyone available to write up a PEP on how to turn super into a
> keyword? Inside regular and class methods, super.foo(args) should be
> equivalent to super(ThisClass, self).foo(args). I think there are ways
> to make the old syntax work t
On 4/18/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/17/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The locale module doesn't deal with Unicode, only with 8-bit characters
> > > (not
> > > multi-byte characters). You'll lose
Is anyone available to write up a PEP on how to turn super into a
keyword? Inside regular and class methods, super.foo(args) should be
equivalent to super(ThisClass, self).foo(args). I think there are ways
to make the old syntax work too, but maybe that's only necessary for
2.6.
--
--Guido van Ro
On 4/18/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/17/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The locale module doesn't deal with Unicode, only with 8-bit characters (not
> > multi-byte characters). You'll lose this anyway. Certainly
> > string.letters is not going to provide this
On 4/17/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/17/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There are also reasons to want only "local" letters. For example, in
> > a French interface, I might want to include the extra French letters,
> > but not the Greek.
> The Unicode world
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I first suggested just chopping off the flowid and scopeid parts of the
> > tuple. Itojun's reply seems to indicate we could potentially get away
> > with merging the scopeid to the IP address part in a standard fashion,
> > and discarding the flow
16 matches
Mail list logo
