On 5/4/19 3:54 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote:
On 5/4/19 2:48 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
04.05.19 05:46, Eric V. Smith пише:
Is there a policy against using Unicode identifiers in test files?
As part of adding !d to f-strings, there's a code path that's only
executed if the text of the expression
On 5/4/19 2:48 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
04.05.19 05:46, Eric V. Smith пише:
Is there a policy against using Unicode identifiers in test files?
As part of adding !d to f-strings, there's a code path that's only
executed if the text of the expression is non-ascii. The easiest way
to exercise
04.05.19 05:46, Eric V. Smith пише:
Is there a policy against using Unicode identifiers in test files?
As part of adding !d to f-strings, there's a code path that's only
executed if the text of the expression is non-ascii. The easiest way to
exercise it, and the way I found a bug, is by using
On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 10:46:03PM -0400, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> Is there a policy against using Unicode identifiers in test files?
[...]
> I could work around this with exec-ing some strings, but that seems like
> added confusion that I'd avoid with a real Unicode identifier.
"Look, that's why
On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 10:46 PM Eric V. Smith wrote:
> Is there a policy against using Unicode identifiers in test files?
>
> As part of adding !d to f-strings, there's a code path that's only
> executed if the text of the expression is non-ascii. The easiest way to
> exercise it, and the way I
Is there a policy against using Unicode identifiers in test files?
As part of adding !d to f-strings, there's a code path that's only
executed if the text of the expression is non-ascii. The easiest way to
exercise it, and the way I found a bug, is by using an identifier with
Unicode chars. I
