Message317018
| Author | takluyver |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Devin Jeanpierre, barry, eric.araujo, eric.snow, mark.dickinson, martin.panter, mbussonn, meador.inge, michael.foord, petri.lehtinen, serhiy.storchaka, takluyver, terry.reedy, trent, vstinner |
| Date | 2018-05-18.08:21:22 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1526631682.82.0.682650639539.issue12486@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
I agree, it's not a good design, but it's what's already there; I just want to ensure that it won't be removed without a deprecation cycle. My PR makes no changes to behaviour, only to documentation and tests. This and issue 9969 have both been around for several years. A new tokenize API is clearly not at the top of anyone's priority list - and that's fine. I'd rather have *some* unicode API today than a promise of a nice unicode API in the future. And it doesn't preclude adding a better API later, it just means that the existing API would have to have a deprecation cycle. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2018-05-18 08:21:22 | takluyver | set | recipients: + takluyver, barry, terry.reedy, mark.dickinson, vstinner, Devin Jeanpierre, trent, eric.araujo, michael.foord, meador.inge, eric.snow, petri.lehtinen, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka, mbussonn |
| 2018-05-18 08:21:22 | takluyver | set | messageid: <1526631682.82.0.682650639539.issue12486@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2018-05-18 08:21:22 | takluyver | link | issue12486 messages |
| 2018-05-18 08:21:22 | takluyver | create | |