Author pitrou
Recipients christian.heimes, flox, isoschiz, jcea, pitrou, r.david.murray, serhiy.storchaka, sijinjoseph
Date 2013-04-14.17:36:25
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1365960986.07.0.131028751272.issue17618@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Hi and thanks for the patch!

> I named the Mercurial base85 implementation functions with the "b85"
> prefix. For the Ascii85 ones, I used "a85". I considered overloading
> the same functions with a keyword argument to select which encoding,
> but rejected that. Thoughts?

I agree, it's better like this.

> I haven't made the changes to add a pure Python binascii module as
> suggested in msg186216. Although poorly named, "base64.py" already contains 
> a number of other encodings, so this seemed the best place for these too.

Yes, I think it's ok. I was thinking about binascii in the context of making a C version, but we can refactor things later anyway.

Now about the patch: I haven't read it in detail, but it seems to lack tests for b85decode and b85encode. It should be easy enough to get some test values by calling Mercurial's version.
History
Date User Action Args
2013-04-14 17:36:26pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, jcea, christian.heimes, r.david.murray, flox, sijinjoseph, serhiy.storchaka, isoschiz
2013-04-14 17:36:26pitrousetmessageid: <1365960986.07.0.131028751272.issue17618@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2013-04-14 17:36:26pitroulinkissue17618 messages
2013-04-14 17:36:25pitroucreate