Equivalent of Perl chomp?

[Michael Hudson]

"Tim Peters" <tim.one at home.com> writes:

> A few things going on in this test under the covers:
> 
> + endswith does indeed pay a large price for building a bound
>   method object every time.  It's not only the dict lookup to
>   resolve "endswith", but also malloc and free to build the
>   bound method object and discard it afterwards.

Method objects have a free list, so you're not really paying for a
malloc/free most of the time.  Actually, it looks like this free list
can only grow, so you'll never pay for the free...

Cheers,
M.

-- 
  We've had a lot of problems going from glibc 2.0 to glibc 2.1.
  People claim binary compatibility.  Except for functions they
  don't like.                       -- Peter Van Eynde, comp.lang.lisp