[Python-Dev] [patch #100912] should we keep the \xnnnn escape in unicode strings?
Sun, 16 Jul 2000 14:24:56 -0400
> for maximum compatibility with 8-bit strings and SRE,
> let's change "\x" to mean "binary byte" in unicode string
> literals too.
> I've prepared a small patch. If nobody objects, I'll check
> it in next weekend, or so...
> [patch 100912]
> There were objections from Finn Bock and myself: \xXXXX is
> defined to mean "read all hex chars until the next non-hex char
> and then cast to the underlying type (char or wchar_t)" in C9X.
Python and C9X are different languages -- Python isn't obligated to ape
C9X's backward-compatibility hacks.
> Don't know about Java... Finn ?
Java doesn't have \x notation, period -- Java isn't insane <wink>. Finn was
talking about JPython's attempts to make sense of Python's \x notation.
> Not that this definition is optimal, but we should stick to what
> the standard says ...
Why? It's a standard for a different language. Most of what C9X says about
\x boils down to "implementation-defined" anyway, and that's unPythonic on
the face of it.