join()

[Hans Nowak]

On 9 Oct 00, Michal Wallace wrote:

> > > My advice is to boycott those methods and continue
> > > using the string module, which fortunately is
> > > still there.
> > 
> > I second that. I never really saw the need for string methods anyway...
> > then again, maybe I'm just daft. :)  However, it's not unlikely that the
> > string module will be deprecated, like other nice stuff. So I don't know
> > if it's a good idea to boycott it. 
> 
> ",".join.(sequence) makes perfect sense. There's no reason someone
> can't add sequence.join(',') later.. :)

Well... the old way to say this was string.join(seq, separator)... I can 
see why attaching the method to a (non-existing) sequence object is not 
possible... but attaching it to a string, which is the optional second 
argument of the function, seems to be non-intuitive to many. I am not 
claiming there is a better solution; I just hope that the string module 
will stay with us for quite a while.

> String methods are important to minimize complexity with unicode:

Don't get me started... :)

--Hans Nowak (ivnowa at hvision.nl)
Info Vision Europe BV