On Sun, Sep 1, 2019 at 10:28 AM Yedidyah Bar David <didi@redhat.com> wrote:

Hi all,

That's a "sub-thread" of "unicode sandwich in otopi/engine-setup".

I was recommended to use 'six.text_type() over "u''". I did read [1],
and eventually decided that my own preference is to just add "u"
prefix. Reasoning is inside [1].

Do people have different preferences/reasoning they want to share?

Do people think we should have project-wide policy re this?

Since our code is currently transitioning from py2 to py2/py3, and not from py3 to py3/py2, it would be fair to assume that most

already existing string literals in it contain ascii symbols, unless explicitly stated otherwise;

so IMO it would only make sense to enforce 'u' over newly added literals which involve non-ascii symbols as long as py2 is still alive.

Personally, I do not see the big advantage of adding "six.text_type()"
(15 chars) instead of a single "u". I do see where it can be useful,
but not as a very long replacement, IMO, for "u", or for
unicode_literals.

Once py2 will be officially terminated, probably neither option mentioned above would be meaningful as unicode is py3's default string encoding;

however IMO for literals it seems that an explicit 'u' is a more native approach, and provides clarity about the intentions of the programmer compared

to a global switch button in the form of import unicode_literals. Using six.text_type() is probably a good solution nowadays for variables and not literals,

and would probably have to die off some day after py2 does the same.

Thanks and best regards,

[1] http://python-future.org/unicode_literals.html
--
Didi
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list -- devel@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/
oVirt Code of Conduct: https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives: https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/devel@ovirt.org/message/SW3P4VOGBP43N54CQEH3YURN6X5ZMWIX/