Hi, Georg Brandl <g.brandl <at> gmx.net> writes:
> I'd argue that "find" is more primitive than "split" -- split is intuitively > implemented using find and slicing, but implementing find using split and > len is unintuitive. (Of course, "index" can be used instead of "find".) It surely is, but it would probably make sense to require both. Maybe have something like this: class SymbolSequence(Sequence) class String(SymbolSequence) String would be the base of str/unicode and CharacterSequence of str/bytes. A SymbolSequence is basically a sequence based on one type of symbols that implements slicing, getting symbols by index, count() and index(). A String is basically everything a str/unicode provides as method except of those which depend on informatio based on the symbol. For example upper() / isupper() etc would go. Additionally I guess it makes sense to get rid of encode() / decode() / format(). Regards, Armin _______________________________________________ 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
