Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Python: Dev

Is it safe to assume that Python 2.7 is always built with unicode support?

 

 

Python dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


taschini at ieee

Apr 26, 2012, 2:39 AM

Post #1 of 4 (284 views)
Permalink
Is it safe to assume that Python 2.7 is always built with unicode support?

Hello every one,

I'm looking into issue 1065986 [1], and in order to submit a patch I need
to know whether I have to take into account the eventuality that cpyhon 2.7
be built without unicode support.

As far as I can see it is no longer possible to configure cpython 2.7 with
--disable-unicode as a consequence of the merge 59157:62babf456005 on 27
Feb 2010 of the commit 59153:8b2048bca33c of the same day.

Since I could not find an discussion on the topic leading explicitly to
this decision, I was wondering whether this is in fact an unintended
consequence of the check introduced in 59153:8b2048bca33c, which excludes
"no" from the acceptable values for configuring unicode support.

In conclusion, can you guys confirm that I don't have to worry that cpython
2.7 could be built with no unicode support? Or not?

If so, shouldn't it be properly documented, at least in Misc/NEWS ?

Bye,
Stefano

[1] http://bugs.python.org/issue1065986


martin at v

Apr 26, 2012, 7:01 AM

Post #2 of 4 (279 views)
Permalink
Re: Is it safe to assume that Python 2.7 is always built with unicode support? [In reply to]

> I'm looking into issue 1065986 [1], and in order to submit a patch I need
> to know whether I have to take into account the eventuality that cpyhon 2.7
> be built without unicode support.

It's intended (at least, it is *my* intention) that Python 2.7 can be built
without Unicode support, and it's a bug if that is not possible anymore.
Certain embedded configurations might want that.

That doesn't mean that the bug needs to be fixed; this can be deferred until
somebody actually requests that bug being fixed, or better, until somebody
contributes a patch to do so.

However, it *does* mean that we shouldn't further break the feature, at least
not knowingly.

OTOH, it's clear that certain functionality cannot work if Unicode is
disabled,
so it may be acceptable if pydoc breaks in such a configuration.

Regards,
Martin


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev [at] python
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/list-python-dev%40lists.gossamer-threads.com


taschini at ieee

Apr 26, 2012, 8:07 AM

Post #3 of 4 (271 views)
Permalink
Re: Is it safe to assume that Python 2.7 is always built with unicode support? [In reply to]

Understood.

May I suggest that http://bugs.python.org/issue8767 be reopened, to make
things clear?

Stefano


On 26 April 2012 16:01, <martin [at] v> wrote:

> I'm looking into issue 1065986 [1], and in order to submit a patch I need
>> to know whether I have to take into account the eventuality that cpyhon
>> 2.7
>> be built without unicode support.
>>
>
> It's intended (at least, it is *my* intention) that Python 2.7 can be built
> without Unicode support, and it's a bug if that is not possible anymore.
> Certain embedded configurations might want that.
>
> That doesn't mean that the bug needs to be fixed; this can be deferred
> until
> somebody actually requests that bug being fixed, or better, until somebody
> contributes a patch to do so.
>
> However, it *does* mean that we shouldn't further break the feature, at
> least
> not knowingly.
>
> OTOH, it's clear that certain functionality cannot work if Unicode is
> disabled,
> so it may be acceptable if pydoc breaks in such a configuration.
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>


rdmurray at bitdance

Apr 26, 2012, 9:05 AM

Post #4 of 4 (267 views)
Permalink
Re: Is it safe to assume that Python 2.7 is always built with unicode support? [In reply to]

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:07:46 +0200, Stefano Taschini <taschini [at] ieee> wrote:
> May I suggest that http://bugs.python.org/issue8767 be reopened, to make
> things clear?

Done.

--David

PS: we prefer no top-posting on this list. It makes it far easier
to retain just enough context to make a message stand on its own
when properly edited.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev [at] python
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/list-python-dev%40lists.gossamer-threads.com

Python dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.