[Python-Dev] deprecating string module?
Barry A. Warsaw
Wed, 29 May 2002 09:59:06 -0400
>>>>> "SL" == Steven Lott <email@example.com> writes:
SL> The true majority are the "yet to start" users, for whom the
SL> String class will be the only thing they ever use;
SL> irrespective of the deprecation state of string.
Remember that there's a lot more of them ("yet to start" users) than
there are of us ("dinosaurs" :).
>>>>> "TL" == Tino Lange <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
TL> I cannot see/understand why it's the "best" way to write for
| fromaddr = " ".join(map(lambda x: x ,
TL> with this (IMHO not intuitive empty string " ") instead of
| fromaddr = string.join(map(lambda x: x ,
TL> It's much cleaner to read and understand with string instead
TL> of " " - at least for beginners, or?
We've been down this road so many times it hurts. I kind of suspect
that it's secretly string.join() keeping the string module alive more
than anything else <wink>. Personally, I really like ''.join() --
which I spell EMPTYSTRING.join() -- but then I like Rush, uni, and
Uncle Timmy's Farm Report. All are acquired tastes.
So let's write that join() builtin and be done with it!
>>>>> "PF" == Peter Funk <email@example.com> writes:
PF> In my opponion the string module is one such situation and
PF> another one is the '<>' operator. Most of my employees work
PF> with Modula-2 a lot and we have a huge code base. So they
PF> prefer to use '<>' over '!=' in Python also and they will not
PF> stop to do so, although the use of '<>' is discouraged in the
PF> Python documentation.
The one difference is that <> is favored by some people close to
Guido's heart. He'd never piss off his brother or his sysadmin. :)