[Andrew Koenig, starting with l=[2, 3, 4]] > ... > I would have thought that after l.insert(-1, 1), l would be > [2, 3, 1, 4], but it doesn't work that way. Alas, list.insert() existed before sequence indices were generalized to give a "count from the right end" meaning to negative index values. When the generalization happened, it appears that list.insert() was just overlooked. I'd like to change this. If I did, how loudly would people scream? Guido says he also wishes list.insert() had been defined with the arguments in the opposite order, so that list.insert(object) could have a natural default index argument of 0. I'd like to change that too, but it's clearly too late for that one.
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