PEP 358 and operations on bytes
bignose+hates-spam at benfinney.id.au
Wed Oct 4 04:56:31 CEST 2006
Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> writes:
> This would just be bloat
How would it be bloat? I'm describing a situation where the existing
methods merely move, being implemented in a common ancestor rather
than directly in the concrete sequence classes.
> without any use cases being demonstrated. What is your crying need
> for these methods?
I don't think I claimed a crying need for one. Consistency, where not
foolish, is desirable.
I don't deny that there is work involved; my suggestion was in the
context of talking about a common ancestor to 'bytes' and 'str', in
order to refactor some of the common methods.
> Your *real* generalisation of the string method would actually
> require you to write
> ["foo", "bar", "spam", "baz", "quux", "wibble"].startswith(["foo"])
Yes, you're right. I realised that after sending, but didn't correct
> Python didn't get to be the language it is today by adding
> unnecessary hypergeneralisations on a whim. Show me how these
> methods will improve the daily lives of programmers and I'll
> champion them to the developers, but I don't think the world will be
> beating a path to your door.
Again, I'm discussing a still-nascent suggestion for a common sequence
ancestor; there are no demands here. If there is to be generalisation,
I'm merely pointing out that it could be at a higher level and be more
If nothing else, it would lend more coherence to the "str is a
sequence" confusion if *all* sequences shared some str-derived
\ "I used to be a narrator for bad mimes." -- Steven Wright |
More information about the Python-list