Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
Steven D'Aprano writes:
On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 09:22:13 +0300, Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
Terry Reedy writes:
On 8/27/2010 3:43 PM, Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
Dave Angel writes:
There could easily be a .reverse() method on strings. It would return
the reversed string, like .swapcase() returns the swapcased string.
Could be, but the main use case seems to be for palindrome testing ;-)
Given that slicing and reversed() can do the same thing, the need is
thin.
The need is quite thin, but immutability of strings is not an issue,
just like there can be .swapcase() though strings are immutable. That is
all I am saying above.
You're right, there could be a reversed() method for strings. There
could also be a disemvowel method that removes vowels, a randomise
method that shuffles the letters around, a studlycaps method that
changes the case of each letter randomly, and a method to check that
brackets () are well- formed. They would all be useful to
somebody. There are lots of different methods that strings could
have. Where do you draw the line?
When I said that there could be such a method, I was merely objecting
to a statement, made in response to me, that there could not be such a
method because strings are immutable. You clearly agree with me that
that statement was not correct. Would you have let it stand if it was
made to you?
Since you repeat that assertion three times, I figure you must think
it's important. And it was I who asserted that a reverse() method
wouldn't be possible on an immutable object. reverse() would reverse
the characters in place, and return None. At least it would if it tried
to be at all consistent with the list, array, and audioop methods of the
same name.
reversed() is certainly possible, and it'd make a new string with the
reverse order of the original.
DaveA
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
