On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 7:13 AM, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Steven D'Aprano > <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > On Tuesday 14 July 2015 14:07, Ian Kelly wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> > >> wrote: > >>> Correct. But rather than removing it, it would be better to take a leaf > >>> out of re.match's book and return None as the sentinel. That would > >>> eliminate the "using -1 as a valid index" bug. > >> > >> Better IMO to just have the one non-redundant method that raises an > >> exception rather than returning anything that could possibly be > >> interpreted as a string index. > > > > > > Well, maybe, but if you got rid of str.find, the first thing people > would do > > is recreate it: > > > > def find(*args): > > try: > > return str.index(*args) > > except ValueError: > > return -1 > > > > > > Having a version of str.index that returns a sentinel is just too damn > > handy. > > Same as dictionaries have [] and .get(), although find doesn't allow > you to change the sentinel. > > Maybe that is the solution? Add a keyword-only argument to find to change the sentinel?
-- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
