Just by the title I thought you meant
>>> [1].join([2, 3, 4])
[2, 1, 3, 1, 4]
This is what I'd expect on the list class.
So -1 for your suggestion but +1 for what I thought you meant before I read the
complete mail :)
> On 29 Jan 2019, at 02:40, Jamesie Pic <j...@yourlabs.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> During the last 10 years, Python has made steady progress in convenience to
> assemble strings. However, it seems to me that joining is still, when
> possible, the cleanest way to code string assembly.
>
> However, I'm still sometimes confused between the different syntaxes used by
> join methods:
>
> 0. os.path.join takes *args
> 1. str.join takes a list argument, this inconsistence make it easy to mistake
> with the os.path.join signature
>
> Also, I still think that:
>
> '_'.join(['cancel', name])
>
> Would be more readable as such:
>
> ['cancel', name].join('_')
>
> Not only this would fix both of my issues with the current status-quo, but
> this would also be completely backward compatible, and probably not very hard
> to implement: just add a join method to list.
>
> Thanks in advance for your reply
>
> Have a great day
>
> --
> ∞
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
