Implicit conversion to str in str.join method?

[Kirill Balunov]

>
> print(*iterable, sep=", ")


Thanks, I apologize :-) and why I always manage to find complicated ways...

With kind regards,
-gdg

2018-02-26 22:43 GMT+03:00 Chris Angelico <rosuav at gmail.com>:

> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 6:38 AM, Kirill Balunov <kirillbalunov at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Currently `str.join` raises `TypeError` if there are any non-string
> values
> > in iterable, including `bytes` objects. Is it an awful idea to implicitly
> > _cast_ elements in iterable to their `str` or `repr` representation? Was
> > this question adressed before?
> >
> > As for me there are two valid points: On one hand "Explicit is beter than
> > implicit" and on the other "Practicality beats purity". May be I'm the
> only
> > one who finds that it is rather boring to write somehting like:
> >
> >     ", ".join(str(i) for i in iterable)
> >
> > when iterable contains non-string values, instead of:
> >
> >     ", ".join(iterable)
> >
> > I don't know how much overhead will yield for the case when iterable
> > contains only strings...and if it is possible to optimize this case. This
> > change is backward compatible, but as I wrote above, it can be perceived
> > badly and yield a huge overhead for general case that it is not even
> worth
> > discussing. What do you think?
>
> This would be a perfect job for map.
>
> ", ".join(map(str, iterable))
>
> If this is for display, you could also just print the values directly:
>
> print(*iterable, sep=", ")
>
> ChrisA
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>