Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> well, the empty string is a valid substring of all possible strings >>> (there are no "null" strings in Python). you get the same behaviour >>> from slicing, the "in" operator, "replace" (this was discussed on the >>> list last week), "count", etc. > >> Although Tim pointed out that replace() only regards >> n+1 empty strings as existing in a string of lenth >> n. So for consistency, find() should only find them >> in those places, too.
depends on how you interpret the reference to "slices" in the docs. "abc"[100:] is an empty string, and so is "abc"[100:100]. > And "abc".count("") should return 4. it does, and has always done (afaik). "abc".count("", 100) did use to return -96, though, which is hard to explain in terms of anything else. </F> _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com