On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 07:00:00PM -0700, Christopher Barker wrote: > > But with all that, I don't see why such a "mutable string" would be > > more suitable for "string builder" pattern. > > It would in one small way, which is that it would be usable directly in > many (not all by any means) contexts where strings are used
I don't think that this is likely to be the case. I think it was Andrew (apologies for misattributing this if it was someone else) who pointed out that the CPython internals make a lot of assumptions about strings that would make it very difficult to retrofit a mutable string class to be usable in its place. -- Steven _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/X4Y5QP4WB3O4UZP2T6YE4HQSDMDT6V3U/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
