Carl Johnson writes:
Bruce Leban wrote:
[i for i in s.split(x) if i] is simple enough if I don't know how to write "(" + re.escape(x) + ")+".
The point of the dropempty keyword would be less the dropempty=True case as the s.split(None, dropempty=False) case, which would otherwise require a regexp.
-0. Eliminating str.split()'s implementation in favor of using str.split() in the no argument case and re.split when an argument is present is backward incompatible, so I can't really object although I prefer a fix by documenting re.split() in appropriate places. I do file a technical objection and ask the judge to strike the wording "require a regexp" from the transcript as prejudicial to the accused.<wink> Preferred phrasing is "would otherwise require an import of re."