RetroSearch Browse

Sun Dec 3 22:42:26 CET 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-December/070162.html

Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> 
>>> I know what the Zen says about special cases, but in this case the rules
>>> were apparently broken with impunity.
>> 
>> Well, the proposal was to interpret m[i] as m.group(i), for all values
>> of i. I can't see anything confusing with that.
> 
> it can quickly become rather confusing if you also interpret m[:] as 
> m.groups(), not to mention if you add len() and arbitrary slicing to
> the mix.  what about m[] and m[i,j,k], btw?

What about them? They aren't supposed to be supported by every object
that allows subscript, are they? And why not just not implement len()?

As for the [:] <-> groups() issue, [:] would have to be consistent with
indexing and return the whole match and the subgroups.

(Or, the API could be overhauled completely of course, remember it's Py3k.)

Georg

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-December/070162.html below:

[Python-Dev] a feature i'd like to see in python #2: indexing of match objects