>> You could I suppose though that would just be adding another hack on >> top of existing questionable behavior. Antoine> Agreed. We should fix the original function so that it has the Antoine> obvious, intented effect. Leaving the buggy function in place Antoine> and adding another function with the proper behaviour sounds Antoine> ridiculous. If we add commonpath or commonpathprefix or pathprefix, or whatever, then find someplace to move the existing commonprefix function (maybe to the string module or as a class method of string objects?) then could we make a 2to3 fixer for this? Skip
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