"Tim Peters" <tim.one@home.com> writes: > It would be better in this case to go back to the top and start > over. Yes. What you checked in is obviously better. I'll stick to being the bearer of bad tidings... > However, then an adversarial user can construct a case that never > terminates. I seem to have done this - it was odd, though - it only loops when I bump the dict to fairly enormous preportions for reasons I don't really (want to) understand. > Unclear what to do. Not worrying about it seems entirely reasonable - I now have sitting on my hard drive the wierdest way of spelling "while 1: pass" *I've* ever seen. and-I'll-stop-poking-holes-now-ly y'rs m. -- The rapid establishment of social ties, even of a fleeting nature, advance not only that goal but its standing in the uberconscious mesh of communal psychic, subjective, and algorithmic interbeing. But I fear I'm restating the obvious. -- Will Ware, comp.lang.python
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