Skip Montanaro wrote: > > Nothing has really jumped out as the "right" way to express the proposed > builtin that does > > map(None, l1, l2, l3, l4) > > How about collate? What we're doing is effectively what a copy machine does > when it collates multiple copies of its input... +1 on collate! -- Paul Prescod - Not encumbered by corporate consensus It's difficult to extract sense from strings, but they're the only communication coin we can count on. - http://www.cs.yale.edu/~perlis-alan/quotes.html
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