This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the Archer project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [python] Pretty-printers for non-ASCII data (take 2).

The main reason to expose any char* as a Python str object is to let
the Python code do whatever it wants with the data. Trying to
represent an array of bytes (which is what a char* is) as a unicode
object inherently obscures the data and makes it harder to write
Python printers. On the other hand, Python str objects can only handle
8-bit bytes, and the exact bytes are probably already available by
iterating the array and converting each element to an int.

<bikeshed>For the name, Python 2 uses str/unicode to describe byte
arrays and unicode character strings, while Python 3 uses bytes/str to
make the same distinction. To avoid confusion, I'd probably name the
Value methods "bytes" and "unicode". "String" is just too ambiguous.
But I won't object at all if y'all like data/string better.</bikeshed>

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov<> wrote:
> Greetings,
> Previous thread on this subject:
> Jeffrey Yasskin suggests that in addition to gdb.Value.string we need a
>, len) returning a Python 'str' object with just raw
> contents of the value, which can then be passed to e.g. binascii.hexlify()
> for printing.
> Does that sound reasonable? I'll send a patch if it is.
> Thanks,
> --
> Paul Pluzhnikov

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]