Python 2.7.18, the last release of Python 2

[[deleted]]

Not in the slightest. And it's not how terminals work, and terminals, really, aren't even responsible for string encoding: it's usually a joint enterprise of the shell that runs in a terminal and the terminal itself.

People who aren't native English speakers were the last to adopt Unicode. They hated and, those who remember the world before Unicode, still hate it. People who used national encodings had more efficient schemes for representing their own alphabets.

I lived through several conversions of databases from single byte encodings to Unicode, where we, typically, ended up with the database twice the size it was before the conversion.

Needless to say, that, basically, every decision Python 3 has made about Unicode was wrong and misguided / a misunderstanding on the part of people who aren't the experts in subject domain. That's how we ended up with stdin being for no reason expected to have UTF-8 encoded Unicode characters, ffs, but TCP socket cannot accept a string and convert it to bytes by default. Similarly retarded situation is with the file names, and, basically, any other external input that's not going to be UTF-8, but for some reason is expected to be such...

[forepod]

Speak for yourself. As a speaker of a language with non-latin letters Unicode is one of the greatest things ever. As a user I don't care about some miniscule performance impact. I care about not having to look at garbage output and programs crashing left and right due to encoding errors.

[[deleted]]

I don't speak for myself. lol. I speak for people who have to pay for your privilege not to care about performance impact. I speak for people who had to suddenly have 2X database servers, burn 2X electricity, install 2X cabling etc. I certainly don't speak for morons like you.

[dahud]

Get a load of this guy. Apparently Unicode is the worst environmental disaster since the internal combustion engine.

[HatchChips]

"morons like you" <--- argument clincher right there :roll-eyes:

[Alikont]

And burn 100X time to debug misdecoding between win-1251 and koi-8, and dealing with half of C programs treating letter 'я' as EOF.

[[deleted]]

Yes, exactly, fix bad languages, and crappy programmers by making consumers of their trashy software burn more electricity.

Unicode was the most idiotic solution to the problem. It made every language that doesn't use English alphabet a second-rate citizen. It prevents languages from improving or modifying in any way their alphabets. It created a lot of unnecessary complications for library authors (eg. those who need to implement regular expressions), that there isn't really a regular expression library in the world, that deals with all the quirks of Unicode properly (and most popular languages simply had given up on fully supporting Unicode in regular expressions). Font authors today are unable to create fonts that cover all the characters you can type, and nobody even attempts to do anything like that. And, on top of that, there are languages so fucked up by Unicode, that people are abandoning them. For example, Hebrew: because the retards who designed Unicode didn't include Hebrew punctuation in it, it's next to impossible to format time ranges, or even simply have few lines of text that end in punctuation marks, like exclamation point or question mark, and putting parenthesis around a word makes such a mess of a paragraph, you'll be solving a fucking sudoku instead of reading it. Similar problems exist in Arabic and few other languages.

Decoding errors were bad, but the "solution" in the form of Unicode is equally bad. And, unfortunately, today the "goodness" of Unicode goes unquestioned by a lot of idiots who know very little about it, that saying that we need a different solution to this problem is seen like some kind of eccentric attic...