统一规范是要求，不是说服。

冗余字段的设计是有道理的，或许有时候水平分库就是错误的区分

缺少某种微量元素有可能

第三四五个项目都可以不写，技能水平属于合格水平。

厦

在腾讯大夏哈哈哈哈

@EIlenZe 此时应该好好学习英语。https://daily.zhihu.com/story/401

我猜是分页出现问题，特性特性

@niubee1 你也配喷？请尽量让自己的回复能够对别人有帮助，已 block

@Hopetree 效率上有差距，虽然大多数的情况下不管，但是作为纯技术讨论是有意义的

附带官方解释： https://docs.python.org/2/faq/design.html#why-isn-t-there-a-switch-or-case-statement-in-python

if else 是官方认可的方式

只要不出错并且效率高，用意念也行呀

@zj299792458 每月

@zj299792458 一年十万平均？上海 2017 年平均工资不到 1w

有理有据，你们看过？

@locktionc
@xuboying
@kmahyyg
@noNOno

1) Waaaaay too much work -- calibre has half a MILLION lines of python and python extension code

2) calibre has lots and lots of code that deals with bytes -- network protocols, binary file formats, etc. Python 3 is simply worse than python 2 for this use case. It has a crippled bytes type among other unfelicities.

3) calibre has lots and lots of native code that interfaces with external native code. On windows, all this code uses UTF-16 encoded strings. All that interface code would need to be re-written and would also become less efficient since in python 2 string are stored internall in UTF-16 whereas in python 3 they would need to be cross-converted.

4) There is absolutely nothing in python 3 that makes it worth the effort. If python 3 ever grows something that makes it worth the effort, I will simply backport it to python 2. I already maintain my own python 2 fork for windows (see my github repos).

The only case in which I will accept patches for python 3 is if they have:

a) negligible runtime cost
b) minimal code complexity/maintainability cost
c) Low probability of breakage -- either the patches are dead simply or they come with lots of tests

帝都问题有点多呀，魔都表示非常稳定，已经没有实体卡了

@j2001588 据我所知 ss 暂时只能监听少数几个加密方式。

现在开始进行职业规划还来得及，不要只看到眼前这一点东西