[Python-Dev] Deprecate from __future__ import unicode_literals? (original) (raw)

Fabio Zadrozny fabiofz at gmail.com
Tue Dec 20 10:50:36 EST 2016

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Chris Barker <chris.barker at noaa.gov> wrote:

Please don't get rid of unicode+literals -- I don't even think we should depreciate it as a recommendation or discourage it.

Maybe a note or two added as to where issues may arise would be good. I've found importing unicodeliterals to be an excellent way to write py2/3 code. And I have never found a problem. I'm also hoping that my py2/3 compatible code will someday be py3 only -- and then I'll be really glad that I don't have all those u" all over the place. Also it does "automagically" do the right thing with, for instance passing a literal to the file handling functions in the os module -- so that's pretty nice. The number of times you need to add a b"" is FAR fewer than "text" string literals. Let's keep it. -CHB Same thing here... also, it helps coding with the same mindset of Python 3, where everything is unicode by default -- and yes, there are problems if you use a unicode in an API that accepts bytes on Python 2, but then, you can also have the same issues on Python 3 -- you need to know and keep track on the bytes vs unicode everywhere (although they're syntactically similar to declare, they're not the same thing) and I find that there are less places where you need to put b'' than u'' (if you code with unicode in mind in Python 2)...

On the ideal world, Python 2 would actually be improved to accept unicode on the places where Python 3 accepts unicode (such as subprocess.Popen, etc) to make it easier in porting applications that actually do the "right" thing on Python 2 to go to Python 3.

Best Regards,

Fabio​ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20161220/b2d77cea/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list