fix: correct index() examples and section order in Day 4#800
Open
Revati-N wants to merge 1 commit intoAsabeneh:masterfrom
Open
fix: correct index() examples and section order in Day 4#800Revati-N wants to merge 1 commit intoAsabeneh:masterfrom
Revati-N wants to merge 1 commit intoAsabeneh:masterfrom
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #796
Changes made
day_4.py
index()section (around line 136) which was incorrectly using.find()instead of.index()isdecimal()section which had leftover.find()calls instead of actualisdecimal()examples04_strings.md
### Escape Sequences in Stringssection to appear after#### Unpacking Characters, so the doc order matches the.pyfileWhy
A beginner following the
.pyfile in the terminal and cross-referencing the.mddoc would see escape sequences before indexing in the doc, but indexing before escape sequences in the code — causing confusion. The.index()section was also silently demonstrating.find()behavior instead.