It states zero or maybe more occurrence of whitespace characters, followed by a comma and then accompanied by zero or maybe more prevalence of whitespace people.
In such a case, it helps make no difference, since you are replacing all the things with the empty string (Whilst it would be greater to use s+ from an effectiveness point of view). In case you were being changing with a non-empty string, The 2 would behave in a different way. Share Increase this remedy Abide by
so "indent" specifies just how much Room to allocate for the string that follows it within the parameter record.
Making use of %s in scanf without an explcit industry width opens exactly the same buffer overflow exploit that will get did; particularly, if you will discover extra figures inside the enter stream as opposed to concentrate on buffer is sized to carry, scanf will happily publish those additional figures to memory outside the house the buffer, likely clobbering a thing crucial. Regrettably, as opposed to in printf, you can't provide the field with being a run time argument:
The clarification at the rear of the code if i'm employing %s instead of %c in my printf segment on the code eighty two
The 1st regex will match one whitespace character. The second regex will reluctantly match one or more whitespace characters. For many uses, these two regexes are incredibly related, other than in the next situation, the regex can match far more on the string, if it stops the regex match from failing. from
The main one particular matches a single whitespace, While the next one matches one particular or many whitespaces. They're the so-named regular expression quantifiers, and so they conduct matches similar to this (taken in the documentation):
And because your second parameter is vacant string "", there's no distinction between the output of two scenarios.
The PEP isn't going to say "supplanted" and in no Element of the PEP does it say the % operator is deprecated (yet it does say other matters are deprecated down the bottom). You might want str.format and that is good, but right until there's a PEP indicating it really is deprecated there is not any sense in boasting it really is when it's not.
Discover also that I am employing a tuple here too (after you only have a person string using a tuple is optional) to illustrate that a number of strings could be inserted and formatted in a single assertion.
The width will not be specified in the format string, but as yet another integer price argument preceding the argument that has to be formatted.
In an eclipsing binary orbited by an Earth like Earth, would the drops in brightness be recognizable?
To start with you might want to realize that closing output of both the statements is going to be exact i.e. to eliminate all the spaces from read more provided string.
So the 1st if assertion translates to: in case you haven't passed me an argument, I'll show you how you'll want to go me an argument Sooner or later, e.g. you'll see this on-screen: