guido wrote:
> > > Tell that to the people who write L.append(1, 2, 3) despite that =
it
> > > was never documented. :-(
> >=20
> > I do -- if and when I see that (haven't seen it in ages). Technical
> > managers at development shops know about stuff "accidentally
> > working" and are more tolerant of bug-fixes against that than of
> > other backwards-compatibility breaks, in my experience.
>=20
> Hm. This was widely complained about, probably because many examples
> (including in books) got it wrong.
fwiw, these days, I get
TypeError: append() takes exactly 1 argument (2 given)
far too often to think that I picked this up by reading
the wrong books. it's an easy mistake, and it used to
do the "right thing"...
</F>
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