On Thu, May 17, 2007, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > To be honest, I have never understood the repeated proposals to get > rid of the string module. Get rid of the functions that are just > duplicates of str methods, sure, but the module makes sense to me > as a home for text related constants and other machinery (such as > string.Template and the various building blocks for more advanced PEP > 3101 based formatting).
The trend in support seems to be toward moving everything left that is useful from "string" to "text", which would be a package. Overall, I'm +1 on that idea. I can see arguments in favor of leaving string, but that name just has too much baggage. -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "Look, it's your affair if you want to play with five people, but don't go calling it doubles." --John Cleese anticipates Usenet _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
