Just by the title I thought you meant
>>> [1].join([2, 3, 4])
[2, 1, 3, 1, 4]
This is what I'd expect on the list class.
So -1 for your suggestion but +1 for what I thought you meant before I read the
complete mail :)
> On 29 Jan 2019, at 02:40, Jamesie Pic wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> During
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 4:48 PM David Mertz wrote:
> In the first case, the object (a heterogenous list) can NEVER support a
> .join() method. It's simply the wrong kind of object. Of course, it's right
> as far as the basic type system goes, but its deeper (maybe "structural")
> type cannot
One could always write
str.join('_', ['list', 'of', 'strings'])
I'm not advocating for this syntax, but perhaps it is clarifying. Also, a
quick search finds this thread from 20 years ago on this very issue:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/1999-June/095366.html
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019, 12:22 AM Brendan Barnwell
> What would you expect to happen with this line:
> >
> > ['foo', b'foo', 37, re.compile('foo')].join('_')
>
> That problem already exists with str.join though. It's just
> currently spelled this way:
>
> ','.join(['foo', b'foo', 37,
If there is a more Pythonic way of joining lists, tuples, sets, etc., it is
by using a keyword and not a method. For example, using a keyword, say
*joins*:
'-' joins ['list', 'of', 'strings']
>
This is more readable than using the method join() since you can read this
as "dash joins a list of
On 2019-01-28 18:22, David Mertz wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 8:44 PM Jamesie Pic mailto:j...@yourlabs.org>> wrote:
['cancel', name].join('_')
This is a frequent suggestion. It is also one that makes no sense
whatsoever if you think about Python's semantics. What would you expect
to
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 8:44 PM Jamesie Pic wrote:
> ['cancel', name].join('_')
>
This is a frequent suggestion. It is also one that makes no sense
whatsoever if you think about Python's semantics. What would you expect to
happen with this line:
['foo', b'foo', 37,
PS: sorry for my silly example, i know that example could also be written
f'cancel_{name}', which is awesome, thank you for that ! But for more
complex strings I'm trying to avoid:
def foo():
return textwrap.dedent(f'''
some
{more(complex)}
{st.ri("ng")}
''').strip()
For some
Hello,
During the last 10 years, Python has made steady progress in convenience to
assemble strings. However, it seems to me that joining is still, when
possible, the cleanest way to code string assembly.
However, I'm still sometimes confused between the different syntaxes used
by join methods:
Wow, thank you very much for all those answers and hints to my message.
David opened my eyes with this: Functions return a single value, period.
Yes, this means my question is not about a function, it is about assignment.
Dictionary unpacking could be used for my use case.
Since it does not
10 matches
Mail list logo
