[loeg]

Why do your users care about symbols internal to your code?

[eyelidlessness]

They don't, they care about `str` being unicode and developers not having to do additional work to support unicode strings.

[flavio81]

Strings can be unicode in Python2, you start a unicode string with u".

Python2​ has full unicode support. While Python3 supports only unicode strings.

[eyelidlessness]

I was thinking through my response to this, and realized that I would just be repeating what I already said.

Is there any reason to require extra work to support unicode strings?

[asdfgadsfgasfdg]

I've come into large python2 projects which had been started with non-unicode strings (because the initial developers didn't think about it). At some point a user with non-English characters invariably signs up and then shortly complains. It has been significant work to (1) convert everything that should be converted to unicode (2) re-train the developers to use the unicode syntax.

[loeg]

Python 3 has, more or less, just renamed unicode() to str() and str() to bytes(). unicode() support was already complete in Python 2. The rename is not a user-facing feature.

[eyelidlessness]

String literals are unicode by default, which they were not before.

[JupiterMoon]

True. It is a nice thing for scientific code though. Often in a field α etc etc have a known meaning by convention and being able to write them as α rather than alpha can really make longer formulas more readable.

[soperj]

if you do open source development, your users are your testers and your future developers.