Sye van der Veen added the comment:
In the sep!=None case, there are existing alternatives to prune=True that
aren't many more keystrokes:
>>> ''.split(' ', prune=True)
[]
>>> [x for x in ''.split(' ') if x]
[]
>>> list(filter(bool, ''.split(' '))) # or drop list() and use the iterator
>>> directly
[]
This becomes even fewer keystrokes for users that create a prune() or
split_prune() function.
For the sep==None case, I agree there are no alternatives to prune=False (aside
from rolling your own split function). However, instead of prune, what if sep
accepted a tuple of strings, similar to startswith. In this case, each string
would be considered one possible, yet distinct, delimiter:
>> ''.split(prune=False)
['']
>> ''.split((' ', '\t')) # typical whitespace
['']
>> ''.split(tuple(string.whitespace)) # ASCII whitespace
['']
Once again, this becomes even easier for users that create a split_no_prune()
function, or that assign tuple(string.whitespace) to a variable. It would also
nicely handle strings with non-homogeneous delimiters:
>>> '1?2,,3;'.split((',', ';', '?'))
['1', '2', '', '3', '']
I personally find the 0-argument str.split() one of the great joys of Python.
It's common to have to split out words from a sentence, and having that
functionality just 8 characters away at all times has been very useful.
----------
nosy: +syeberman
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue28937>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
