Fredrik Lundh wrote: > well, the empty string is a valid substring of all possible strings > (there are no "null" strings in Python). you get the same behaviour > from slicing, the "in" operator, "replace" (this was discussed on the > list last week), "count", etc. Although Tim pointed out that replace() only regards n+1 empty strings as existing in a string of lenth n. So for consistency, find() should only find them in those places, too. -- Greg
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