➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author ezio.melotti
Recipients ezio.melotti, gvanrossum, lemburg, loewis, mrabarnett, tchrist, terry.reedy
Date 2011-09-30.20:30:42
SpamBayes Score 3.286651e-06
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1317414642.85.0.0881821462071.issue12753@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content 
Leaving named sequences for unicodedata.lookup() only (and not for \N{}) makes sense.

The list of aliases is so small (11 entries) that I'm not sure using a binary search for it would bring any advantage.  Having a single lookup algorithm that looks in both tables doesn't work because the aliases lookup must be in _getcode for \N{...} to work, whereas the lookup of named sequences will happen in unicodedata_lookup (Modules/unicodedata.c:1187).
I think we can leave the for loop over aliases in _getcode and implement a separate (and binary) search in unicodedata_lookup for the named sequences.  Does that sound fine?
History
Date User Action Args
2011-09-30 20:30:42ezio.melottisetrecipients: + ezio.melotti, lemburg, gvanrossum, loewis, terry.reedy, mrabarnett, tchrist
2011-09-30 20:30:42ezio.melottisetmessageid: <1317414642.85.0.0881821462071.issue12753@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2011-09-30 20:30:42ezio.melottilinkissue12753 messages
2011-09-30 20:30:42ezio.melotticreate