Michael Hoffman writes: > Dare I ask whether the uncompiled versions [of re object methods] should > be considered for removal in Python 3.0? > > *puts on his asbestos jacket*
No flames here, but I'd rather leave them. The docs make it clear that the two sets of functions/methods are equivalent, so the conceptual overhead is small (at least it doesn't scale with the number of methods in re). The docs make it clear that the compiled versions are faster, so serious users should prefer them. But the uncompiled versions are preferable in one special situation: short simple scripts -- the kind of thing often done with shell scriping except that Python is Better (TM). For these uses, performance is irrelevent and it turns a 2-line construct into a single line. Of course the uncompiled versions can be written as little 2-line functions but that's even WORSE for short simple scripts. Nearly everything I write these days is larger and more complex, but I retain a soft spot for short simple scripts and want Python to continue to be the best tool available for these tasks. -- Michael Chermside _______________________________________________ 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
