A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-May/065204.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] whatever happened to string.partition ?

[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] whatever happened to string.partition ? [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] whatever happened to string.partition ?Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Fri May 26 03:38:02 CEST 2006
On 5/25/06, Fredrik Lundh <fredrik at pythonware.com> wrote:
> Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
> > IIRC, Skip had developed a smart  version that returned lazy string
> > objects that kept a reference and pointers to the original string
> > (instead of making its own copy of the string components).  The string
> > subclass would expand itself and free the reference if necessary for a
> > subsequent string operation.  The main purpose was to handle the cases
> > where one fragment of the other was never used or just had a length
> > check.  Also it was helpful when partition was used lisp-style to
> > repeatedly break-off head/tail fragments.
>
> that sounds nice in theory, but I completely fail to see how that can be
> implemented without ripping out the existing string object and replacing
> it with something entirely different, or (via horrible macro tricks)
> slow down virtually all other use of PyStringObject.
>
> skip?  was this a real design or a Py3K bluesky idea?

I suggest to forget about that particular idea and just do what you
were thinking of originally. str.partition() and unicode.partition()
should be as simple as possible, to cover the 80% use case FAST.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4