On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 8:54 AM Random832 <random...@fastmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, at 11:05, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Not so fast. re.search() returns a Match object, while re.finditer()
> > and re.findall() return strings. For people who are just interested in
> > strings, the Match object is just a distraction. I think I am +1 on
> > adding re.findfirst() as proposed by the OP.
>
> Er, findall returns strings, but finditer returns match objects.


Sorry, my bad. Strike finditer() then, the point about findall() being
different stands.


> And as a side note, PEP 505 would allow the case of wanting the string or
> None to be written as re.search(...)?.group(0).
>

Still not a particularly discoverable solution. (Given that regular
expressions are often used by less sophisticated users.)


> (Since findall returns a list, it can be written as ....findall(...)[0],
> which is much better than next(iter(....findall(...))).)
>

Sure, but because both of these fail if there are no matches, we can't use
them in general, and findfirst() is meant to address that by having a
default rather than failing in that case.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/BWKJJFUSV6J33BPF2SYWJHQW2BHIG36M/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to