Paddy wrote: > Sybren Stuvel wrote: >> Paddy enlightened us with: >> > Well, after all the above, there is a question: >> > >> > Why not make sum work for strings too? >> >> Because of "there should only be one way to do it, and that way should >> be obvious". There are already the str.join and unicode.join methods, >> which are more powerful than sum. >> >> Sybren > I get where you are coming from, but in this case we have a function, > sum, that is not as geeral as it could be. sum is already here, and > works for some types but not for strings which seems an arbitrary > limitation that impede duck typing.
Only that it isn't arbitrary. > - Pad. > > P.S. I can see why, and am used to the ''.join method. A newbie > introduced to sum for integers might naturally try and concatenate > strings using sum too. Yes, and he's immediately told what to do instead. Georg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
