Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
Hello, On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 16:25:07 -0700 Christopher Barker pythonchb@gmail.com wrote:
As others have pointed out, the OP started in a bit of an oblique way, but it maybe come down to this: There are some use-cases for a mutable string type. For avoidance of doubt: nothing in my RFC has anything to do, or implies, "a mutable string type". A well-know pattern of string builder, yes. Piggybacking on existing StringIO/BytesIO classes, yes. Anything else, no. To not leave it cut and dry: IMHO, we need more const'ness in Python, not less. I my dreams I already do stuff like: from __future__ import const class Foo: pass # This is an alias for "Foo" Bar: const = Foo # This is a variable which can store a reference to Foo or any other class Baz = Foo [This is not a new RFC! Please start a new thread if you'd like to pick it up ;-)]
If I understand you are proposing a change from StringIO `write` method to `+=` operator. Is it right? I cannot see any advantage on this proposal since there is no real change in the implementation of StringIO. Or are you proposing any change in the underlying implementation and I have missed that point? In this case, I disagree with you: StringIO is a stream and I think that it is wrong to make it to "look & feel" like a string. That is my opinion. Sorry if I misunderstand you.