Message103910
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> Antoine Pitrou <pitrou@free.fr> added the comment:
>
> Or perhaps the bytearray can be converted to a bytes object. This is not optimal performance-wise but is unlikely to make a difference in real-world code (if you are passing a filename to an external API, chances are some IO will occur which will dwarf the cost of creating a separate bytes object).
>
> But I agree that supporting bytearrays in filename-taking functions, while "nice" from a consistency point of view, isn't really useful in practice. So I would be ok to remove that support if it simplifies (or avoids complexifying) the logic for those functions.
+1
bytearrays are basically the remains of the attempt to use mutable
byte string objects in Python 3.x. They may gain some usefulness
in the future, but I doubt that this will be in the area of filenames. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-04-21 20:44:55 | lemburg | set | recipients:
+ lemburg, loewis, pitrou, vstinner |
2010-04-21 20:44:54 | lemburg | link | issue8485 messages |
2010-04-21 20:44:54 | lemburg | create | |
|