Noam Raphael wrote: > is currently "Return a shallow copy of a set." > > Perhaps "shallow" should be removed, since set members are supposed to > be immutable so there's no point in a deep copy? That still doesn't make copy return a deep copy, right? "shallow copy" is more precise than "copy", and correct - what is gained from removing it? Regards, Martin
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