On Sep 6, 5:53 pm, "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > En Thu, 06 Sep 2007 20:48:31 -0300, Zentrader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > escribi?: > > > On Sep 6, 12:47 am, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Maybe better the ``in`` operator for the '*string*' type. `str.find()` > >> will go away in the future. > > > string.find serves a useful purpose in that it returns the starting > > location of the string found, or -1 if not found, so if you wanted to > > slice "abdecf" on"c", string.find will tell you where that is. > > PEP3100 says it will be removed, but at the same time says [UNLIKELY]... > <http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3100/#id36> > > partition serves almost the same purpose and its easier to use. > > -- > Gabriel Genellina
The Perl community has an expression "There is more than one way to do it". As in, Perl is good because you have multiple choices (whether it's a function/module/class/operator) of how to implement a particular piece of logic. More choices is often good, but this can lead to a problem in that you might be presented with more things to learn and or you come across less common ways of doing something that you are not familiar with in code you are trying to understand. Does the Python community have a position regarding duplicate ways in the language to achieve something in your code? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list