On Sat, Jun 2, 2018 at 12:57 AM, Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 1 June 2018 at 15:36, Dan Strohl via Python-list > <python-list@python.org> wrote: >> So... how does one go about suggesting changes to the built in types? I >> could take a whack at the code for it, but my C skills are no where near >> what should probably be needed for something this close to the core of the >> language. I'm not sure if adding a couple of methods is a PEP type of thing. > > It would probably have to go via python-ideas, but if it gets the OK > there I doubt it would need a PEP.
Yeah, take it to -ideas but don't worry about a PEP. > There are a few key questions I'd expect to see come up. > > Why does this need to be a string method? Why can't it be a standalone > function? Maybe you should publish an implementation on PyPI, collect > some data on how popular it is, and then if it's widely used, propose > it for inclusion in the stdlib at that point? By making it a string > method, you're also restricting its use to users of recent versions of > Python, whereas a PyPI implementation would work for everyone. The biggest reason to make it a string method is to give the possibility of optimization. Python cannot optimize int(1.2) down to the constant 1 because you might have shadowed int; but a method on a string literal cannot be shadowed, and could potentially be constant-folded. Include that in the initial post to preempt this recommendation. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
