On 07/18/2010 01:18 PM, News123 wrote: > Mark Lawrence wrote: >> On 17/07/2010 23:17, MRAB wrote: >>> Chris Rebert wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:27 AM, MRAB <pyt...@mrabarnett.plus.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Jason Friedman wrote: >>>> >>>> It's a pity that str.strip() doesn't actually take a set() of length-1 >>>> strings, which would make its behavior more obvious and cut down on >>>> this perennial question. >>>> >>> Even better, a set (or tuple) of strings. It's the kind of thing that >>> could've been done in Python 3, with Python 2's .strip(string) becoming >>> .strip(set(string)), but it didn't occur to me until too late. :-( >> >> Maybe 3.2 which is still in alpha, if not 3.3? >> >> Kindest regards. >> >> Mark Lawrence. >> > > It could even be introduced without breaking compatibility. > > if being defined as > str.rstrip([iterable]) > so you could either call
> string.rstrip( [ '-dir' ] ) > or as > string.rstrip( '-dir' ) The former should certainly raise an exception. '-dir' is not a single character ! Or it should actually strip '-dir', or '-dir-dir', but not 'r--i'... but that's just silly. > > > However I wouldn't be sure, that it really reduces the amount of > questions being asked. > > In order to reduce the ambiguities one had to have two distinct functions. > If one wouldn't want to break backwards-compatibility, then the new > names would be for stripping off prefixes / suffixes and could be > str.strip_prefix(prefixes) / str.rstrip_suffix(suffixes) > > > I'd love to have this functionality, though I can live with importing my > self written function. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
