On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <step...@xemacs.org>wrote:
> Ian Bicking writes:
>
> > I'm proposing these specials would be used in polymorphic functions,
> like
> > the functions in urllib.parse. I would not personally use them in my
> own
> > code (unless of course I was writing my own polymorphic functions).
> >
> > This also makes it less important that the objects be a full stand-in
> for
> > text, as their use should be isolated to specific functions, they aren't
> > objects that should be passed around much. So you can easily identify
> and
> > quickly detect if you use unsupported operations on those text-like
> > objects.
>
> OK. That sounds reasonable to me, but I don't see any need for
> a builtin type for it. Inclusion in the stdlib is not quite a
> no-brainer, but given Guido's endorsement of polymorphism, I can't
> bring myself to go lower than +0.9 <wink>.
>
Agreed on a builtin; I think it would be fine to put something in the
strings module, and then in these examples code that used '/' would instead
use strings.ascii('/') (not sure so sure of what the name should be though).
--
Ian Bicking | http://blog.ianbicking.org
_______________________________________________
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
