On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Jack Woehr
<jwoehr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Go Language goes even further in this direction.
Goes further in which direction? Judging by this:
<
https://blog.golang.org/strings>
I would say that Go has gone in the opposite direction as Python.
Which I think is understandable, given the design and intended uses of
Go. Particularly telling is this philosophical difference between Go
and Python 3:
<blockquote>
In fact, the definition of "character" is ambiguous and it would be a
mistake to try to resolve the ambiguity by defining that strings are
made of characters.
</blockquote>
But the creator of Python spent a long and arduous year specifically
working on the problem of how to define strings so that they ARE made
of *characters*, and NOT bytes. He felt so strongly about this that he
risked fracturing the Python community by breaking compatibility with
Python 2 to accomplish this.
While diametrically opposed, I guess what Go shares with Python 3 is
the clear distinction between bytes and characters. (At least, I am
trusting that this is the case with Go, given that blog post by none
other than Rob Pike.) Many languages conflate bytes and strings, and
that may well be worse than being clearly on one side of the fence or
the other (at least in the post-ASCII world we live in today).
John Y.
midrange.com
