[Python-Dev] Proof of the pudding: str.partition()
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Wed Aug 31 16:54:07 CEST 2005
On 8/31/05, Charles Cazabon <python at discworld.dyndns.org> wrote:
> I would think that perhaps an optional second argument to the method that
> controls whether it searches from the start (default) or end of the string
> might be nicer than having two separate methods, even though that would lose
> parallelism with the current .find/.index.
> While I'm at it, why not propose that for py3k that
> .rfind/.rindex/.rjust/.rsplit disappear, and .find/.index/.just/.split grow an
> optional "fromright" (or equivalent) optional keyword argument?
This violates one of my design principles: don't add boolean options
to an API that control the semantics in such a way that the option
value is (nearly) always a constant. Instead, provide two different
The motivation for this rule comes partly for performance: parameters
are relatively expensive, and you shouldn't make the method test
dynamically for a parameter value that is constant for the call site;
and partly from readability: don't bother the reader with having to
remember the full general functionality and how it is affected by the
various flags; also, a Boolean positional argument is a really poor
clue about its meaning, and it's easy to misremember the sense
PS. This is a special case of a stronger design principle: don't let
the *type* of the return value depend on the *value* of the arguments.
PS2. As with all design principles, there are exceptions. But they
are, um, exceptional. index/rindex is not such an exception.
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
More information about the Python-Dev