Re: Add support for base64url variant

[Stefan Monnier]

>>> Would it be any interest if I try to add others bases encoding as
>>> defined in RFC 4648 ?  I think, first, to BASE32 and maybe on BASE16
>>> later.
>> I have never needed those.  Let's hear what others have to say.

Same here.

> Base32url is useful for use on case-insensitive filesystems or
> with case-insensitive protocols.

That's what it's designed for, yes, but I can't think of any example
where that's useful.  E.g. for case-insensitive filenames, using a hash
instead of a base32 encoding was a better option in all the cases I've
encountered because I only needed "one-way" and it conveniently bounds
the max file name length.


        Stefan