Message 57527 - Python tracker

Author	doerwalter
Recipients	Rhamphoryncus, doerwalter, gagenellina, gvanrossum, jgsack
Date	2007-11-15.12:57:09
SpamBayes Score	0.369984
Marked as misclassified	No
Message-id	<1195131429.89.0.409413961237.issue1328@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
jgsack wrote: > > If codec utf_8 or utf_8_sig were to accept input with or without the > 3-byte BOM, and write it as currently specified without/with the BOM > respectively, then _I_ can reread again with either utf_8 or utf_8_sig. That's exactly what the utf_8_sig codec does. The decoder accepts input with or without the BOM (the (first) BOM doesn't get returned). The encoder always prepends a BOM. Or do you want a codec that behaves like utf_8 on reading and like utf_8_sig on writing? Such a codec indead indead wouldn't roundtrip.

jgsack wrote:
>
> If codec utf_8 or utf_8_sig were to accept input with or without the
> 3-byte BOM, and write it as currently specified without/with the BOM
> respectively, then _I_ can reread again with either utf_8 or utf_8_sig.

That's exactly what the utf_8_sig codec does. The decoder accepts input
with or without the BOM (the (first) BOM doesn't get returned). The
encoder always prepends a BOM.

Or do you want a codec that behaves like utf_8 on reading and like
utf_8_sig on writing? Such a codec indead indead wouldn't roundtrip.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2007-11-15 12:57:10	doerwalter	set	spambayes_score: 0.369984 -> 0.369984 recipients: + doerwalter, gvanrossum, jgsack, gagenellina, Rhamphoryncus
2007-11-15 12:57:09	doerwalter	set	spambayes_score: 0.369984 -> 0.369984 messageid: <1195131429.89.0.409413961237.issue1328@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2007-11-15 12:57:09	doerwalter	link	issue1328 messages
2007-11-15 12:57:09	doerwalter	create