Message115523
Better specifying requirements is good. A few comments:
- The second argument is an error message; it is converted to a string object.
+ The second argument is an error message; it is decoded to a string object
+ with ``'utf-8'`` encoding.
I would write the change as
+ The second argument is a utf-8 encoded error message; it is decoded to a string object.
I the second part (what the function will do with the arg) really needed? I think in the current version, it serves to indirectly specify that the arg in not to be a string, but bytes. If the specific encoding required is specified, that also says bytes, making 'will be decoded' redundant and irrelevant.
-------------------------------
+ a Python exception (class, not an instance). *format* should be a string
+ encoded to ISO-8859-1, containing format codes,
*format* should be ISO-8859-1 encoded bytes containing format codes,
although I am not clear about the implications of that. Are not all format code ascii chars?
--------------------------------
I do not really like 'encoded to', but 'decoded to' is wrong. 'will be decoded from xxx bytes' is better. I think there should be a general discussion somewhere about bytes arguments and the terminology that will be used. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-09-03 22:38:39 | terry.reedy | set | recipients:
+ terry.reedy, vstinner, eric.araujo, dmalcolm, docs@python |
2010-09-03 22:38:39 | terry.reedy | set | messageid: <1283553519.84.0.638183558151.issue9738@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2010-09-03 22:38:37 | terry.reedy | link | issue9738 messages |
2010-09-03 22:38:37 | terry.reedy | create | |
|