On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 19:12:30 -0400, David Abrahams <dave at boost-consulting.com> wrote: > Report from the field: I just discovered a bug that's been hiding in > my code for a few months. The code was being exercised, but the > result was the same as if the code had been correct until I threw > some new examples at it. The problem was: > > self.body[e[0]:e[1]] = s > > self.body is a list of strings, and s is a string. Later > ''.join(self.body) gets called, so for many cases the bug was hidden. > No offense intended (okay, maybe a tiny little offense), but the > experience here is a bit Perl-like. It's a fair complaint. I've made the mistake myself, and it usually takes a few head scratching and investigation before I realize that I'm passing a string instead of some other sequence. On the other hand, I like slicing lists and occasionally I iterate over their characters. What's the alternative? A typecheck seems like it would be handy, but I'm not sure what type I would want "all sequences except strings"? Jeremy
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