"JvR" == Just van Rossum email@example.com writes:
JvR> Recommending replacing all of these (not to mention all the JvR> code "out there") with named constants seems plain silly.
Until there's a tool to do the migration, I don't (personally) recommend wholesale migration. For new code I write though, I usually do it the way I described (which is intuitive to me, but then so is moving your fingers at a blinding speed up and down 5 long strips of metal to cause low bowel-tickling rumbly noises).
JvR> So, making join() a builtin makes a whole lot of sense. Not JvR> doing this because people sometimes use a local reference to JvR> os.path.join seems awfully backward.
I agree. Have we agreed on the semantics and signature of builtin join() though? Is it just string.join() stuck in builtins?