[Python-Dev] PEP 467: last round (?)

[Koos Zevenhoven]

On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 7:59 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3 September 2016 at 03:54, Koos Zevenhoven <k7hoven at gmail.com> wrote:
>> chrb seems to be more in line with some bytes versions in for instance os
>> than bchr.
>
> The mnemonic for the current name in the PEP is that bchr is to chr as
> b"" is to "". The PEP should probably say that in addition to pointing
> out the 'unichr' Python 2 inspiration, though.

Thanks for explaining. Indeed I hope that unichr does not affect any
naming decisions that will remain in the language for a long time.

> The other big difference between this and the os module case, is that
> the resulting builtin constructor pairs here are str/chr (arbitrary
> text, single code point) and bytes/bchr (arbitrary binary data, single
> binary octet). By contrast, os.getcwd() and os.getcwdb() (and similar
> APIs) are both referring to the same operating system level operation,
> they're just requesting a different return type for the data.

But chr and "bchr" are also requesting a different return type. The
difference is that the data is not coming from an os-level operation
but from an int.

I guess one reason I don't like bchr (nor chrb, really) is that they
look just like a random sequence of letters in builtins, but not
recognizable the way asdf would be.

I guess I have one last pair of suggestions for the name of this
function: bytes.chr or bytes.char.

-- Koos


> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> --
> Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia


-- 
+ Koos Zevenhoven + http://twitter.com/k7hoven +