On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:40:49 +0100, kj <no.em...@please.post> wrote:
In <4a4e2227$0$7801$426a7...@news.free.fr> Bruno Desthuilliers
<bruno.42.desthuilli...@websiteburo.invalid> writes:
kj a écrit :
(snipo
To have a special-case
re.match() method in addition to a general re.search() method is
antithetical to language minimalism,
FWIW, Python has no pretention to minimalism.
Assuming that you mean by this that Python's authors have no such
pretensions:
"There is real value in having a small language."
Guido van Rossum, 2007.07.03
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-July/008663.html
re.match() is part of the library, not the language. The standard
library is in no sense of the word small. It has a mild tendency
to avoid repeating itself, but presumably the stonkingly obvious
optimisation possibilities of re.match() over re.search() are
considered worth the (small) increase in size.
--
Rhodri James *-* Wildebeest Herder to the Masses
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
