On Sun, 26 Aug 2001, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> You're right. But since a string can't be an element of a string, the
> case I'm really interested in would still work.
It's arguable. A character can indeed be an element of a string, and
in Python characters are one-character strings. So this violates
x in s <=> there exists i such that s[i] == x
You could argue that strings should have special behaviour for "in"
to support the common case of finding a substring; then you would have
to argue on grounds of "practicality beats purity".
I might support the argument on grounds of practicality beating purity,
but i'd have to think carefully about violating the above definition.
I can see that "substring in string" would be very convenient, but then
if char in '0123456789': ...
would suddenly have a very different meaning -- it would succeed for
char = '12'.
-- ?!ng
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4