On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 5:42 PM Dennis Sweeney <sweeney.dennis...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I'm removing the tuple feature from this PEP. So now, if I understand
> correctly, I don't think there's disagreement about behavior, just about
> how that behavior should be summarized in Python code.
> [...]
> return (the original object unchanged, or a copy of the object,
> depending on implementation details,
> but always make a copy when working with subclasses)
>
> is well-summarized by
>
> return self[:]
>
> especially if followed by the text
>
> Note that ``self[:]`` might not actually make a copy -- if the affix
> is empty or not found, and if ``type(self) is str``, then these methods
may, but are not required to, make the optimization of returning
> ``self``.
> However, when called on instances of subclasses of ``str``, these
> methods should return base ``str`` objects, not ``self``.
>
> Perhaps:
Note that ``self[:]`` might not actually make a copy of ``self``.
If the affix is empty or not found, and if ``type(self)`` is immutable,
then these methods may, but are not required to, make the
optimization of returning ``self``. ...
[...]
>
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/UWIFAGIT6CKVYGWOCWHAUNFCVSS6TJ3X/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
