python 3.3 repr

Neil Cerutti neilc at
Fri Nov 15 18:47:01 CET 2013

On 2013-11-15, Chris Angelico <rosuav at> wrote:
> Other languages _have_ gone for at least some sort of Unicode
> support. Unfortunately quite a few have done a half-way job and
> use UTF-16 as their internal representation. That means there's
> no difference between U+0012, U+0123, and U+1234, but U+12345
> suddenly gets handled differently. ECMAScript actually
> specifies the perverse behaviour of treating codepoints >U+FFFF
> as two elements in a string, because it's just too costly to
> change.

The unicode support I'm learning in Go is, "Everything is utf-8,
right? RIGHT?!?" It also has the interesting behavior that
indexing strings retrieves bytes, while iterating over them
results in a sequence of runes.

It comes with support for no encodings save utf-8 (natively) and
utf-16 (if you work at it). Is that really enough?

Neil Cerutti

More information about the Python-list mailing list