[Python-Dev] Deprecate `from __future__ import unicode_literals`?

[Fabio Zadrozny]

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Chris Barker <chris.barker at noaa.gov>
wrote:

> Please don't get rid of unicode+literals -- I don't even think we should
> depreciate it as a recommendation or discourage it.
>
> Maybe a note or two added as to where issues may arise would be good.
>
> I've found importing unicode_literals to be an excellent way to write
> py2/3 code. And I have never found a problem.
>
> I'm also hoping that my py2/3 compatible code will someday be py3 only --
> and then I'll be really glad that I don't have all those u" all over the
> place.
>
> Also it does "automagically" do the right thing with, for instance passing
> a literal to the file handling functions in the os module -- so that's
> pretty nice.
>
> The number of times you need to add a b"" is FAR fewer than "text" string
> literals. Let's keep it.
>
> -CHB
>
>
Same thing here... also, it helps coding with the same mindset of Python 3,
where everything is unicode by default -- and yes, there are problems if
you use a unicode in an API that accepts bytes on Python 2, but then, you
can also have the same issues on Python 3 -- you need to know and keep
track on the bytes vs unicode everywhere (although they're syntactically
similar to declare, they're not the same thing) and I find that there are
less places where you need to put b'' than u'' (if you code with unicode in
mind in Python 2)...

On the ideal world, Python 2 would actually be improved to accept unicode
on the places where Python 3 accepts unicode (such as subprocess.Popen,
etc) to make it easier in porting applications that actually do the "right"
thing on Python 2 to go to Python 3.

Best Regards,

Fabio​
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20161220/b2d77cea/attachment.html>