On Jun 28, 2004, at 7:05 AM, Aahz wrote:
On Thu, Jun 24, 2004, Bob Ippolito wrote:
On Jun 24, 2004, at 10:27 AM, Aahz wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
Please do give consideration to putting all of this in a single module. IMO, this is too small of an addition to warrant splitting everything in to packages (which make it more difficult to understand and maintain as a collective unit).
That's true. However, there has been a regular low-level discussion about creating a ``text`` package; why not simply name it ``string``?
If nothing else, that would cause hell for people who would like to use a backport of the package for Python N, where N is less than the first version that had this feature but still had the string module.
This actually makes it *easier* to backport; you only take the submodule you want.
Why is calling it string instead of text easier? You can't easily replace string, because site-packages comes late in sys.path. -bob