On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Ivan Levkivskyi <levkivskyi@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4 September 2016 at 00:11, Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 3, 2016, at 18:06, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
I guess one reason I don't like bchr (nor chrb, really) is that they look just like a random sequence of letters in builtins, but not recognizable the way asdf would be.
I guess I have one last pair of suggestions for the name of this function: bytes.chr or bytes.char.
What about byte? Like, not bytes.byte, just builtins.byte.
I like this option, it would be very "symmetric" to have, compare:
chr(42) '*' str() ''
with this:
byte(42) b'*' bytes() b''
It is easy to explain and remember this.
In one way, I like it, but on the other hand, indexing a bytes gives an integer, so maybe a 'byte' is just an integer in range(256). Also, having both byte and bytes would be a slight annoyance with autocomplete. -- Koos