Le vendredi 28 mai 2010 13:30:22, vous avez écrit :
> Looking at the implementation again, I found that "y#" rejects
> Unicode, while "s#" returns the default encoded version like
> "t#" does in Python2.

Oh, I didn't noticed that.

> So I have to correct what I said earlier:
> 
> "y#" is not the right replacement for "t#" in order to stay compatible
> with its Python2 pendant. The "t#" implementation in Python3 is not
> compatible with the Python2 approach - it's in fact, a totally
> different parser, since Unicode no longer provides a buffer interface
> and thus cannot be used as input for "t#".
> 
> The only compatible pendant to the Python2 "t#" parser marker
> in Python3 appears to be "s#".
> 
> I'll have to think about this some more, but seen in that light,
> removing "t#" in Python3 may actually be a better strategy after
> all - mostly to remove a misguided forward-porting attempt
> and to reduce the number of surprising extension writer will
> see when porting their apps to Python3.

So t#, s# and y# are all different. I'm waiting for your final decision.

"reduce the number of surprising extension writer ..." is a good argument in 
favor of removing t# :-)