Is there any implementation of RFC4648 ("The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings") in Python?
Note, I am specifically looking for RFC 4648, not its predecessor. Other scripting languages might work as long as it does not take too long. Python is preferred.
Python has a base64 module which implements RFC 3548 (an older revision of RFC 4648).
Ruby implements RFC 4648 in the Base64#strict_decode64 and Base64#strict_encode64 methods. Source.
There's a string-operand version of base64 as well:
a_str = 'This is a string'
a_str.encode('base64', 'strict')
'VGhpcyBpcyBhIHN0cmluZw==\n'
It does the same as base64.b64encode but I thought I'll throw it in there as an option.
A Patch:
What you're looking for is "Extended Hex" for the regular base64 module which i remember i installed for a DNSSEC project a while back: http://bugs.python.org/issue16995
The Go standard library has a pretty good base64 implementation (as defined in RFC 4648).
Relevant source file:
base64.go
While working with https://golang.org/src/encoding/base32/base32.go
I wasn't able to find a python implementation of what RFC 4648 refers to as "Base 32 Encoding with Extended Hex Alphabet"; so i wrote one for python:
https://gist.github.com/graham/d7845f00fce0690b65ab049d52c1ddcb
As far as I can tell RFC 3548 doesn't differ if you use the standard character map, but I wasn't able to find a standard way to use the extended hex alphabet.
Feel free to copy paste, i'll write some tests and create a git repo if people think this is a reasonable solution.
i believe this hack will do the trick:
base64_url = base64_string.replace("==","").replace("/", "_").replace("+", "-")
Both Base64 and Base64url are ways to encode binary data in string form. You can read about the theory of base64 here http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base64. The problem with Base64 is that it contains the characters +, /, and =, which have a reserved meaning in some filesystem names and URLs. So base64url solves this by replacing + with - and / with _. The trailing padding character = can be eliminated when not needed, but in a URL it would instead most likely be % URL encoded. Then the encoded data can be included in a URL without problems.
Related
Like in:
u'Hello'
My guess is that it indicates "Unicode", is that correct?
If so, since when has it been available?
You're right, see 3.1.3. Unicode Strings.
It's been the syntax since Python 2.0.
Python 3 made them redundant, as the default string type is Unicode. Versions 3.0 through 3.2 removed them, but they were re-added in 3.3+ for compatibility with Python 2 to aide the 2 to 3 transition.
The u in u'Some String' means that your string is a Unicode string.
Q: I'm in a terrible, awful hurry and I landed here from Google Search. I'm trying to write this data to a file, I'm getting an error, and I need the dead simplest, probably flawed, solution this second.
A: You should really read Joel's Absolute Minimum Every Software Developer Absolutely, Positively Must Know About Unicode and Character Sets (No Excuses!) essay on character sets.
Q: sry no time code pls
A: Fine. try str('Some String') or 'Some String'.encode('ascii', 'ignore'). But you should really read some of the answers and discussion on Converting a Unicode string and this excellent, excellent, primer on character encoding.
My guess is that it indicates "Unicode", is it correct?
Yes.
If so, since when is it available?
Python 2.x.
In Python 3.x the strings use Unicode by default and there's no need for the u prefix. Note: in Python 3.0-3.2, the u is a syntax error. In Python 3.3+ it's legal again to make it easier to write 2/3 compatible apps.
I came here because I had funny-char-syndrome on my requests output. I thought response.text would give me a properly decoded string, but in the output I found funny double-chars where German umlauts should have been.
Turns out response.encoding was empty somehow and so response did not know how to properly decode the content and just treated it as ASCII (I guess).
My solution was to get the raw bytes with 'response.content' and manually apply decode('utf_8') to it. The result was schöne Umlaute.
The correctly decoded
für
vs. the improperly decoded
fĂźr
All strings meant for humans should use u"".
I found that the following mindset helps a lot when dealing with Python strings: All Python manifest strings should use the u"" syntax. The "" syntax is for byte arrays, only.
Before the bashing begins, let me explain. Most Python programs start out with using "" for strings. But then they need to support documentation off the Internet, so they start using "".decode and all of a sudden they are getting exceptions everywhere about decoding this and that - all because of the use of "" for strings. In this case, Unicode does act like a virus and will wreak havoc.
But, if you follow my rule, you won't have this infection (because you will already be infected).
Like in:
u'Hello'
My guess is that it indicates "Unicode", is that correct?
If so, since when has it been available?
You're right, see 3.1.3. Unicode Strings.
It's been the syntax since Python 2.0.
Python 3 made them redundant, as the default string type is Unicode. Versions 3.0 through 3.2 removed them, but they were re-added in 3.3+ for compatibility with Python 2 to aide the 2 to 3 transition.
The u in u'Some String' means that your string is a Unicode string.
Q: I'm in a terrible, awful hurry and I landed here from Google Search. I'm trying to write this data to a file, I'm getting an error, and I need the dead simplest, probably flawed, solution this second.
A: You should really read Joel's Absolute Minimum Every Software Developer Absolutely, Positively Must Know About Unicode and Character Sets (No Excuses!) essay on character sets.
Q: sry no time code pls
A: Fine. try str('Some String') or 'Some String'.encode('ascii', 'ignore'). But you should really read some of the answers and discussion on Converting a Unicode string and this excellent, excellent, primer on character encoding.
My guess is that it indicates "Unicode", is it correct?
Yes.
If so, since when is it available?
Python 2.x.
In Python 3.x the strings use Unicode by default and there's no need for the u prefix. Note: in Python 3.0-3.2, the u is a syntax error. In Python 3.3+ it's legal again to make it easier to write 2/3 compatible apps.
I came here because I had funny-char-syndrome on my requests output. I thought response.text would give me a properly decoded string, but in the output I found funny double-chars where German umlauts should have been.
Turns out response.encoding was empty somehow and so response did not know how to properly decode the content and just treated it as ASCII (I guess).
My solution was to get the raw bytes with 'response.content' and manually apply decode('utf_8') to it. The result was schöne Umlaute.
The correctly decoded
für
vs. the improperly decoded
fĂźr
All strings meant for humans should use u"".
I found that the following mindset helps a lot when dealing with Python strings: All Python manifest strings should use the u"" syntax. The "" syntax is for byte arrays, only.
Before the bashing begins, let me explain. Most Python programs start out with using "" for strings. But then they need to support documentation off the Internet, so they start using "".decode and all of a sudden they are getting exceptions everywhere about decoding this and that - all because of the use of "" for strings. In this case, Unicode does act like a virus and will wreak havoc.
But, if you follow my rule, you won't have this infection (because you will already be infected).
Like in:
u'Hello'
My guess is that it indicates "Unicode", is that correct?
If so, since when has it been available?
You're right, see 3.1.3. Unicode Strings.
It's been the syntax since Python 2.0.
Python 3 made them redundant, as the default string type is Unicode. Versions 3.0 through 3.2 removed them, but they were re-added in 3.3+ for compatibility with Python 2 to aide the 2 to 3 transition.
The u in u'Some String' means that your string is a Unicode string.
Q: I'm in a terrible, awful hurry and I landed here from Google Search. I'm trying to write this data to a file, I'm getting an error, and I need the dead simplest, probably flawed, solution this second.
A: You should really read Joel's Absolute Minimum Every Software Developer Absolutely, Positively Must Know About Unicode and Character Sets (No Excuses!) essay on character sets.
Q: sry no time code pls
A: Fine. try str('Some String') or 'Some String'.encode('ascii', 'ignore'). But you should really read some of the answers and discussion on Converting a Unicode string and this excellent, excellent, primer on character encoding.
My guess is that it indicates "Unicode", is it correct?
Yes.
If so, since when is it available?
Python 2.x.
In Python 3.x the strings use Unicode by default and there's no need for the u prefix. Note: in Python 3.0-3.2, the u is a syntax error. In Python 3.3+ it's legal again to make it easier to write 2/3 compatible apps.
I came here because I had funny-char-syndrome on my requests output. I thought response.text would give me a properly decoded string, but in the output I found funny double-chars where German umlauts should have been.
Turns out response.encoding was empty somehow and so response did not know how to properly decode the content and just treated it as ASCII (I guess).
My solution was to get the raw bytes with 'response.content' and manually apply decode('utf_8') to it. The result was schöne Umlaute.
The correctly decoded
für
vs. the improperly decoded
fĂźr
All strings meant for humans should use u"".
I found that the following mindset helps a lot when dealing with Python strings: All Python manifest strings should use the u"" syntax. The "" syntax is for byte arrays, only.
Before the bashing begins, let me explain. Most Python programs start out with using "" for strings. But then they need to support documentation off the Internet, so they start using "".decode and all of a sudden they are getting exceptions everywhere about decoding this and that - all because of the use of "" for strings. In this case, Unicode does act like a virus and will wreak havoc.
But, if you follow my rule, you won't have this infection (because you will already be infected).
Is there a comprehensive character replacement module for python that finds all non-ascii or non-unicode characters in a string and replaces them with ascii or unicode equivilents? This comfort with the "ignore" argument during encoding or decoding is insane, but likewise so is a '?' in every place that a non translated character was.
I'm looking for one module that finds irksome characters and conforms them to whatever standard is requested.
I realize that the amount of extant alphabets and encodings makes this somewhat impossible, but surely someone has taken a stab at it? Even a rudimentary solution would be better than the status quo.
The simplification for data transfer that this would mean is enormous.
i don't think what you want is really possible - but i think there is a decent option.
unicodedata has a 'normalize' method that can gracefully degrade text for you...
import unicodedata
def gracefully_degrade_to_ascii( text ):
return unicodedata.normalize('NFKD',text).encode('ascii','ignore')
assuming the charset you're using is already mapped into unicode - or at least can be mapped into unicode - you should be able to degrade the unicode version of that text down to ascii or utf-8 with this module ( it's part of the standard library too )
Full Docs - http://docs.python.org/library/unicodedata.html
To look at any individual character and guess its encoding would be hard and probably not very accurate. However, you can use chardet to try and detect the encoding of an entire file. Then you can use the string decode() and encode() methods to convert its encoding to UTF-8.
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/chardet
And UTF-8 is backwards compatible with ASCII so that won't be a big deal.
Like in:
u'Hello'
My guess is that it indicates "Unicode", is that correct?
If so, since when has it been available?
You're right, see 3.1.3. Unicode Strings.
It's been the syntax since Python 2.0.
Python 3 made them redundant, as the default string type is Unicode. Versions 3.0 through 3.2 removed them, but they were re-added in 3.3+ for compatibility with Python 2 to aide the 2 to 3 transition.
The u in u'Some String' means that your string is a Unicode string.
Q: I'm in a terrible, awful hurry and I landed here from Google Search. I'm trying to write this data to a file, I'm getting an error, and I need the dead simplest, probably flawed, solution this second.
A: You should really read Joel's Absolute Minimum Every Software Developer Absolutely, Positively Must Know About Unicode and Character Sets (No Excuses!) essay on character sets.
Q: sry no time code pls
A: Fine. try str('Some String') or 'Some String'.encode('ascii', 'ignore'). But you should really read some of the answers and discussion on Converting a Unicode string and this excellent, excellent, primer on character encoding.
My guess is that it indicates "Unicode", is it correct?
Yes.
If so, since when is it available?
Python 2.x.
In Python 3.x the strings use Unicode by default and there's no need for the u prefix. Note: in Python 3.0-3.2, the u is a syntax error. In Python 3.3+ it's legal again to make it easier to write 2/3 compatible apps.
I came here because I had funny-char-syndrome on my requests output. I thought response.text would give me a properly decoded string, but in the output I found funny double-chars where German umlauts should have been.
Turns out response.encoding was empty somehow and so response did not know how to properly decode the content and just treated it as ASCII (I guess).
My solution was to get the raw bytes with 'response.content' and manually apply decode('utf_8') to it. The result was schöne Umlaute.
The correctly decoded
für
vs. the improperly decoded
fĂźr
All strings meant for humans should use u"".
I found that the following mindset helps a lot when dealing with Python strings: All Python manifest strings should use the u"" syntax. The "" syntax is for byte arrays, only.
Before the bashing begins, let me explain. Most Python programs start out with using "" for strings. But then they need to support documentation off the Internet, so they start using "".decode and all of a sudden they are getting exceptions everywhere about decoding this and that - all because of the use of "" for strings. In this case, Unicode does act like a virus and will wreak havoc.
But, if you follow my rule, you won't have this infection (because you will already be infected).