Antoine Pitrou schrieb: > Georg Brandl <g.brandl <at> gmx.net> writes: >> >> It does, but I don't see how it contradicts my proposition. find() takes a >> substring as well. > > Well, I'm not sure what your proposal was :-) > Did you mean to keep split() out of the String interface, or to provide a > default implementation of it based on find() and slicing? You wrote: > If we stay minimalistic we could consider that the three basic operations that > define a string are: > - testing for substring containment > - splitting on a substring into a list of substrings > - slicing in order to extract a substring I argued that instead of split, find belongs into that list. (BTW, length inquiry would be a fourth.) That the other methods, among them split, can be implemented in terms of those, follows from both sets of basic operations. Georg
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