As a technical issue, you cannot "mutate" strings (change them in-place), so string operations always must return a new string if the result differs from the original. And besides the str.replace() method mentioned, there is str.translate() for doing multiple character remappings in one pass, and the codecs module if you really need more flexibility in customized mappings. More on reddit.com

What is the use case for removesuffix/removeprefix compared to replace? I have a script for automating file transforms (.csv to .txt and such) in which I use the replace function to literally change the file name, like “Example.csv”.replace(‘.csv’, ‘’) To yield “Example” and then just +”.txt” should I switch my code to use the remove functions? More on reddit.com

def join_strings(words):
    result = ""
    for word in words:
        result += word
    return result

print(join_strings(["hello", "world"]))

More on reddit.com

Well you can kinda still use it in global namespace, just do: str.join('_', ['a', 'b', 'c']) Which probably does not help as the string must come first anyway, but its there. And I personally think it could be lst.join('_'), the reason it is not that way, is that you can join tuples and sets using currect way too, if it worked like you proposed, therew would need to be join method for list, tuple, set and any other appliable iterable, which I dont think would be super bad, but whoever was designing python decided against that. To put it simply, you always join using some string, but you can join iterable of different types -> the join method is tied to string. EDIT: I would rather see some automatic conversion to string, so that I could do just ", ".join([1, 2, 3]), without converting the list of numbers to strings, I know that internally it would convert the integers to strings anyway, so there would be no performace benefit, it would be just something nice for the programmer. Not sure why this is not there, maybe a question for further discussion. More on reddit.com