Bryan Olson wrote: > Steve Holden wrote: > > Bryan Olson wrote: > >> Antoon Pardon wrote: > > >> > It probably is too late now, but I always felt, find should > >> > have returned None when the substring isn't found. > >> > >> None is certainly a reasonable candidate. > [...] > >> The really broken part is that unsuccessful searches return a > >> legal index. > >> > > We might agree, before further discussion, that this isn't the most > > elegant part of Python's design, and it's down to history that this tiny > > little wart remains. > > I don't think my proposal breaks historic Python code, and I > don't think it has the same kind of unfortunate subtle > consequences as the current indexing scheme. You may think the > wart is tiny, but the duct-tape* is available so let's cure it. > > [*] http://www.google.com/search?as_q=warts+%22duct+tape%22
Well, nobody stops you from posting this on python-dev and be screamed at by Guido... just-kidding-ly Reinhold -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list