Re: ur'foo' syntax under Python 3

Thank you Peter and Mark for the links. -- nickname: Lele Gaifax | Quando vivrò di quello che ho pensato ieri real: Emanuele Gaifas | comincerò ad aver paura di chi mi copia. l...@metapensiero.it | -- Fortunato Depero, 1929. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-lis

Re: ur'foo' syntax under Python 3

Lele Gaifax wrote: > I'm using Python 3.3, and I was surprised to realize that it does not > support the old Python 2 syntax ur"literal-raw-unicode-strings". > > Is there any trick to write such literals in a Python2+3 compatible > source? > > Is there a rationale behind the invalid syntax or is

Re: ur'foo' syntax under Python 3

On 08/02/2014 19:38, Lele Gaifax wrote: Hi all, I'm using Python 3.3, and I was surprised to realize that it does not support the old Python 2 syntax ur"literal-raw-unicode-strings". Is there any trick to write such literals in a Python2+3 compatible source? Is there a rationale behind the inv

ur'foo' syntax under Python 3

Hi all, I'm using Python 3.3, and I was surprised to realize that it does not support the old Python 2 syntax ur"literal-raw-unicode-strings". Is there any trick to write such literals in a Python2+3 compatible source? Is there a rationale behind the invalid syntax or is it just a glitch? thank