[ python-Bugs-1257525 ] Encodings iso8859_1 and latin_1 are redundant

[SourceForge.net]

Bugs item #1257525, was opened at 2005-08-12 07:22
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by liturgist
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1257525&group_id=5470

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Unicode
Group: Python 2.4
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: liturgist (liturgist)
Assigned to: M.-A. Lemburg (lemburg)
Summary: Encodings iso8859_1 and latin_1 are redundant

Initial Comment:
./lib/encodings contains both:

    iso8859_1.py
    latin_1.py

Only one should be present.  Martin says that latin_1
is faster.  Using the 'iso' name would correlate better
with the other ISO encodings provided.

If the latin_1 code is faster, then it should be in the
iso8859_1.py file.  If an automated process produces
the 'iso*' encodings, then it should either produce the
faster code or stop producing iso8859_1.

Regardless, one of the files should be removed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: liturgist (liturgist)
Date: 2005-08-12 08:12

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=197677

Ok.  How about if we specify iso8859_1 as "(see latin_1)" in
the documentation?

The code will work the same regardless of which encoding
name the developer uses.  Right?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: M.-A. Lemburg (lemburg)
Date: 2005-08-12 07:49

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=38388

Good point.

The iso8859_1.py codec should be removed and added as alias
to latin-1.

Martin is right: the latin-1 codec is not only faster, but
the Unicode integration code also has a lot of short-cuts
for the "latin-1" encoding, so overall performance is better
if you use that name for the encoding.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1257525&group_id=5470