I agree that this is inconsistent and confusing (and I'm quite curious how the implementation ended up this way).
But I have literally NEVER been bitten by this -- perhaps it's because I WAS bitten by it way back when, and then started the habit of ignoring empty strings before I split() -- I have a lot of code like:
line = line.strip() if line:
# do the splitting, or whatever ....
But as Eric says -- it is way too late to change this now -- at least the default behavior.
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 9:08 AM Eric V. Smith firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On 10/20/2020 11:52 AM, Antal Gábor wrote:
This is my first letter here, I'll try my best to explain the problem. First of all, I ran into this "problem" several times. I find str.split() a bit confusing. First of all, this is a corner case, but can happen like every day.
print("".split()) # returns  print("".split(" ")) # returns [''] print("".split("\t")) # returns [''] print("".split("\n")) # returns [''] print("".splitlines()) # returns 
So using split with or without a separator matters a lot, even when we use the same whitespace character split() uses. I think it is quite annoying. My idea is to return a list with an empty string in all cases mentioned above.
With probably millions (at least!) of uses of str.split in real code, there's no way we can change this behavior.
You might be able to argue for an additional parameter to control this, but I personally think the chances of confusion are too high. What I usually do is write a wrapper for str.split if I don't like how it's behaving.
Python-ideas mailing list -- email@example.com To unsubscribe send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://email@example.com/message/FEHVZG... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-- Christopher Barker, PhD
Python Language Consulting