[Python-3000] Support for PEP 3131 (original) (raw)

"Martin v. Löwis" martin at v.loewis.de
Tue May 22 00:27:35 CEST 2007

Would it be acceptable to create an encoding such that you could read and write

Löwis in your editor, but upon import, python treated it as though you had writtten LU246wis Other modules would see LU246wis, unless they also used that encoding -- in which case the user should also see Löwis while editing.

What problem would that solve? You could type the identifier that way - but you would need to know already that this is the identifier you want to type; how do you know?

(I'm not suggesting character-at-a-time replacements as the right answer, but the mechanics of recoding are less important than whether or not to accept the use of mangled internal identifiers.)

Again, I'm uncertain what the use case here would be. For "proper" transliteration, users can memorize easily what the transliterated name would be, and visually identify the two representations. With a "numeric transliteration", users would not normally be able to tell what a transliterated character means, or how to transliterate a given character.

If the above is not acceptable, and even the internal representation has to be readable, then would it be acceptable to make the transliteration strategy something the user could set, similar to today's coding: directive?

Then I don't understand your above proposal. I thought you were proposing to replace all non-ASCII characters with some ASCII form on import of the module. What do you mean by "readable internal representation"?

Regards, Martin

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list