On 2013-02-12, at 22:40 , Ned Batchelder wrote: > But the only reason "".join() is a Python idiom in the first place is because > it was "the fast way" to do what everyone initially coded as "s += ...". > Just because we all learned a long time ago that joining was the fast way to > build a string doesn't mean that "".join() is the clean idiomatic way to do > it.
Well no, str.join is the idiomatic way to do it because it is: > idiomatic |ˌidēəˈmatik| > adjective > 1 using, containing, or denoting expressions that are natural to a native > speaker or would you argue that the natural way for weathered python developers to concatenate string is to *not* use str.join? Of course usually idioms have original reasons for being, reasons which are sometimes long gone (not unlike religious mandates or prohibitions). For Python, ignoring the refcounting hack (which is not only cpython specific but *current* cpython specific *and* doesn't apply to all cases) that reason still exist: python's strings are formally immutable bytestrings, and repeated concatenation of immutable bytestrings is quadratic. Thus str.join is idiomatic, and although it's possible (if difficult) to change the idiom straight string concatenation would make a terrible new idiom as it will behave either unreliably (current CPython) or simply terribly (every other Python implementation). No? _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
