On Thu, 18 May 2000, Tim Peters wrote:
> There may be some hope in that the "for/in" protocol is now conflated with
> the __getitem__ protocol, so if Python grows a more general iteration
> protocol, perhaps we could back away from the sequenceness of strings
> without harming "for" iteration over the characters ...
But there's no way we can back away from
spam = eggs[hack:chop] + ham[slice:dice]
on strings. It's just too ideal.
Perhaps eventually the answer will be a character type?
Or perhaps no change at all. I've not had the pleasure of running
into these problems with characters-being-strings before, even though
your survey of the various gotchas now makes that kind of surprising.
-- ?!ng
"Happiness isn't something you experience; it's something you remember."
-- Oscar Levant
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