Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2000-August/008493.html below:

indexing, indices(), irange(), list.items() (was RE: [Python-Dev] Lockstep iteration

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: indexing, indices(), irange(), list.items()
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: indexing, indices(), irange(), list.items() (was RE: [Python-Dev] Lockstep iteration - eureka!)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Tim Peters writes:
 > I'm stifling it, but, FWIW, I've been trying to sell "indexing" for most of
 > my adult life <wink -- but yes, in my experience too range(len(seq)) is
 > extraordinarly hard to get across to newbies at first; and I *expect*
 > [:len(seq)] to be at least as hard>.

  And "for i indexing o in ...:" is the best proposal I've seen to
resolve the whole problem in what *I* would describe as a Pythonic
way.  And it's not a new proposal.
  I haven't read the specific patch, but bugs can be fixed.  I guess a
lot of us will just have to disagree with the Guido on this one.  ;-(
  Linguistic coup, anyone?  ;-)


  -Fred

-- 
Fred L. Drake, Jr.  <fdrake at beopen.com>
BeOpen PythonLabs Team Member

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: indexing, indices(), irange(), list.items()
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: indexing, indices(), irange(), list.items() (was RE: [Python-Dev] Lockstep iteration - eureka!)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4