In article <h2l1kc$2t...@reader1.panix.com>, kj <no.em...@please.post> wrote: >In <025db0a6$0$20657$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com> Steven D'Aprano ><st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> writes: >>On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:19:40 +0000, kj wrote: >>> >>> If the concern is efficiency for such cases, then simply implement >>> optional offset and length parameters for re.search(), to specify any >>> arbitrary substring to apply the search to. To have a special-case >>> re.match() method in addition to a general re.search() method is >>> antithetical to language minimalism, and plain-old bizarre. Maybe >>> there's a really good reason for it, but it has not been mentioned yet. >> >>There is, and it has. > >I "misspoke" earlier. I should have written "I'm *sure* there's >a really good reason for it." And I think no one in this thread >(myself included, of course) has a clue of what it is. I miss the >days when Guido still posted to comp.lang.python. He'd know.
You may find this enlightening: http://www.python.org/doc/1.4/lib/node52.html -- Aahz (a...@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "as long as we like the same operating system, things are cool." --piranha -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
