GeezerVison

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