can it be shorter?

[kj]

In <023a8d04$0$20636$c3e8da3 at news.astraweb.com> Steven D'Aprano <steve at REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes:

>On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:59:37 +0000, kj wrote:

>> In <h0e0oi$1es2$1 at adenine.netfront.net> "tsangpo"
>> <tsangpo.newsgroup at gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>>I want to ensure that the url ends with a '/', now I have to do thisa
>>>like below.
>>>url = url + '' if url[-1] == '/' else '/'
>> 
>>>Is there a better way?
>> 
>> It's a pity that in python regexes are an "extra", as it were. Otherwise
>> I'd propose:
>> 
>> url = re.sub("/?$", "/", url)


>Thank goodness regexs are an "extra" in Python, because it discourages 
>noobs from pulling out the 80 pound sledgehammer of the regex engine to 
>crack the peanut of a test-and-concatenate:

I was just responding to the OP's subject line.  Whatever else one
may say about my proposal, it *is* shorter.

But thanks for the tip with timeit.  That looks like a good module
to know.

kynn