non-function members of string-module.

[Michael Hudson]

Don O'Donnell <donod at home.com> writes:

> Steven Cummings wrote:
> > 
> > I'm not sure if this has already been discussed in public, but if we
> > want to phase out the use of the string module, then what is the plan
> > for its members, like letter, uppercase, etc.?
> > 
> > /S
> 
> I really hope the string module is never phased out.

It does seem to be pain for no huge reason.

> The string module functions are useful as arguments to the map function,
> as in:
> 
> lines = map(string.strip, lines)
> 
> and for other functional programming uses, where one wants to pass a
> function as an argument.
> 
> Granted, a list comprehension could be used in place of the map
> function:
> 
> lines = [line.strip() for line in lines]
> 
> But it is slower than the map function since the loop is done in Python
> byte code rather than C.

It's not a lot slower in 2.1.1, and seems to be a bit faster in 2.2b1+
(different machins, different OS's, though).

The iteration protocol is getting a bit faster in 2.2, so this isn't a
total shock.

> If, for whatever reason, the string module _is_ eliminated, perhaps the
> string module functions could be replaced by static methods of the str
> class.  Then we could continue to use these static methods as though
> they were functions.  Unfortunately, I guess the names would have to be
> changed since they are already being used as instance methods.  

Nope!

> How
> about just capitalizing the first letter of the name.  
> 
> Just replace:
> lines = map(string.strip, lines)
> 
> with:
> lines = map(str.Strip, lines)    # Strip is a static method of class str
> 
> and it should continue to function as before.  No?

In Python 2.2, 

map(str.strip, lines)

is the fastest of the lot.  Hmm, I feel a patch coming on...

Cheers,
M.

-- 
  Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics,
  because the stakes are so low.                      -- Wallace Sayre