io.open与在python中打开之间的区别 [英] Difference between io.open vs open in python

问题描述

过去，有codecs被io代替.尽管使用io.open似乎更可取，但是大多数入门python类仍然讲授open.

In the past, there's codecs which got replaced by io. Although it seems like it's more advisable to use io.open, most introductory python classes still teaches open.

Python中的open和codecs.open之间有区别，但是 open仅仅是io.open的鸭子类型吗?

There's a question with Difference between open and codecs.open in Python but is open a mere duck-type of io.open?

如果没有，为什么使用io.open更好?为什么使用open进行教学更容易?

If not, why is it better to use io.open? And why is it easier to teach with open?

在这篇文章中( http://code.activestate.com/lists/python -list/681909/)，史蒂文·达普拉诺(Steven DAprano)说，内置的open正在后端使用io.open. 所以我们所有人都应该重构代码以使用open而不是io.open吗?

In this post (http://code.activestate.com/lists/python-list/681909/), Steven DAprano says that the built in open is using the io.open in the backend. So should we all refactored our code to use open instead of io.open?

除了py2.x的向后兼容性之外，还有什么理由在py3.0中使用io.open代替open吗?

Other than backward compatibility for py2.x, are there any reason to use io.open instead of open in py3.0?

推荐答案

根据文档在Python3中的情况:

Situation in Python3 according to the docs:

io.open(file, *[options]*)

这是内置open()函数的别名.

This is an alias for the builtin open() function.

和

虽然内置的open()和关联的io模块是 推荐的方法，用于处理编码的文本文件，此模块 [即编解码器] 提供了其他实用工具功能和类， 在使用二进制文件时，允许使用范围更广的编解码器 文件

While the builtin open() and the associated io module are the recommended approach for working with encoded text files, this module [i.e. codecs] provides additional utility functions and classes that allow the use of a wider range of codecs when working with binary files

(粗体和斜体是我的修改)

(bold and italics are my edits)

这篇关于io.open与在python中打开之间的区别的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！