> if I check a string for for a substring, and this substring isn't found,
> should't the .find method return 0 rather than -1?
> this breaks the
>
> if check.find('something'):
> do(somethingElse)
>
> idiom, which is a bit of a pity I think.
That idiom is spelled:
if 'something' in check:
do(somethingElse)
Unless you really do need to start at a particular offset where
you use the additional parameters of find(), such as
find('something', 3, 42). In that case, you can slice your target:
if 'something' in check[3:42]:
do(somethingElse)
The above is untested, so check for fencepost errors, but the
theory holds.
So pretty much, I'd never consider using find() :)
-tkc
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
