On 4/27/06, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [Fredrik Lundh] > > no, because people enjoy writing readable code. doing things by exe- > > cuting methods attached to literals isn't very readable, and isn't used > > for anything else. > > As Barry often says, he spells it TAB.join() or BLANK.join() (etc) > instead. That's very readable. > > > I don't think anyone on this list can take the "but if there's more than > > one argument, *I* am going to be confused" argument seriously. > > Then you don't remember that the order of arguments here _was_ a > frequent confusion in the old days. If you like a callable with > separator first, you can also do > > join = str.join > > today, and if you like a callable with separator second, you can also do > > from string import join > > today. My bet is that nobody here uses either, because they don't > really find the method spelling distasteful enough to endure the > one-line bother to set up an alternative that would flood their soul > with joy ;-) >
Right, but I am thinking of the newbies for this. I remember when I learned Python and I thought the way str.join() worked was weird (and I still do, although I understand why it how it is). Granted we could just let string concatenation through '+' be more prominent, but we all know the performance issues of looping through an iterator to concatenate strings. > If you want a builtin instead in Py3K, I'm just -0 on that (but -1 if > that's in _addition_ to the three spellings Python already has). I wouldn't want it added without ditching the other two versions as well. Personally I would be fine if string.join() stayed and we considered removing str.join() and just made the string module more prominent (after removing all the deprecated stuff). -Brett _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
