Now if you could benchmark "simplest" that would be a neat trick.

Well, one thing we might ask is which of two ways of doing something results in more work for the same result. In this case, pg's method produces less work because grep has to go through the entire list each time (and then, in scalar context, returns the number of times it found a match) whereas pg explicity returns when he finds the first occurrence. The are both linear, but grep will take about twice the time on average.

For this particular problem, a for loop is probably the Right Way To Do It^&trade. Sure, grep can be used as could map, a C-style for, a while or until, or a couple well-placed goto statements with corresponding labels... but, that doesn't mean they should be. I do agree that, as the OP asked about it, the use of grep should be discussed and, ultimately, the reasons to avoid it should be explained. (An explanation goes a lot further than a benchmark.) But, I don't like showing him how to use grep with no explanation of why it isn't ideal because he's likely to be drawn to the simplicity of the idiom without considering its drawbacks.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";