[Python-Dev] a suggestion ... Re: PEP 383 (again)
"Martin v. Löwis"
martin at v.loewis.de
Thu Apr 30 18:07:33 CEST 2009
> Martin, if you're going to stick with the half-surrogate trick, would
> you mind adding a section to the PEP on "alternate encoding strategies",
> explaining why the NULL method was not selected?
In the PEP process, it isn't my job to criticize competing proposals.
Instead, proponents of competing proposals should write alternative
PEPs, which then get criticized on their own. As the PEP author, I would
have to collect the objections to the PEP in the PEP, which I did;
I'm not convinced that I would have to also collect all alternative
proposals that people come up with in the PEP (except when they are in
fact amendments that I accept).
I hope I had made it clear that I don't try to "shoot down" alternative
proposals, but have rather asked people making alternative proposals
to write their own PEPs. At some point (when the amount of alternative
proposals grew unreasonably), I stopped responding to each and every
alternative proposal that this should be proposed in a separate PEP.
Wrt. escaping with U+0000: I personally disliked it because I considered
it difficult to implement. In particular, on encoding: how do you
arrange the encoder not to encode the NUL character in the encoding, as
it would surely be a valid character? The surrogate approach works
much better here, as it will automatically invoke the error handler.
With further testing, I found that in practice, the proposal also
suffers from the problem that the character would be taken as a
terminating character by APIs - I found that to be a real problem
in gtk, and have added that to the PEP.
More information about the Python-Dev