[Python-Dev] forwarded message from Stephen J. Turnbull

[Martin v. Loewis]

barry@zope.com (Barry A. Warsaw) writes:

> I'm hoping that Stephen will soon be able to join the python-dev
> discussions more directly, and I'm cc'ing him on this message.  I
> admit to wearing the typical American sunglasses on this issue, MM2.1
> not withstanding.  I think Stephen's view point and experience with
> this issue is worth bringing up here.

We have sorted out some of this on python-list already. Stephen
mistook the proposal as talking about the encoding which is used in
the Python source code. With the occasional exception of a Latin-1 "=F6"
in a comment line, I think the Python source is currently pure ASCII -
I would have no problems with changing these few occurrences to UTF-8,
as Stephen suggests.

I'm not sure whether he still has his original position "do not allow
multiple source encodings to enter the language", which, to me,
translates into "source encodings are always UTF-8". If that is the
route to take, PEP 263 should be REJECTED, in favour of only
tightening the Python language definition to only allow UTF-8 source
code.=20

This, of course, will find disapproval from people who currently use
different source encodings. "Not everybody has a UTF-8 editor" is a
frequent complaint from that camp, and I think it is a valid one
(although I personally do have a UTF-8-capable editor, and although
IDLE could be taught into doing UTF-8 only easily). To allow notepad
support, we'd still need to accept the UTF-8 signature at the
beginning of a file.

> Nevertheless, it is supported in XEmacs, and is working in 21.4.6.
> Except ... only in the first line.  Yep, there's explicit code to
> restrict recognition to the first line.  No second or third line, no
> trailing local variables section.  I don't have a problem with
> extending to the first few lines, but the trailing local variables
> section I oppose.

For Python, it probably would have to go to the second line, with the
rationale given in the Emacs manual: the first line is often used for
#!.

> You guys absolutely definitely positively only ever need _first and
> second line_ forever and ever promise cross your heart, right?

Yes. The current proposal does not spell this out, but I think this
restriction is reasonable.

Regards,
Martin