Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #39901
| Path | csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!newsfeed.eweka.nl!eweka.nl!feeder3.eweka.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| Return-Path | <andrew3@r3dsolutions.com> |
| X-Original-To | python-list@python.org |
| Delivered-To | python-list@mail.python.org |
| X-Spam-Status | OK 0.106 |
| X-Spam-Level | * |
| X-Spam-Evidence | '*H*': 0.80; '*S*': 0.01; 'happen,': 0.07; 'variable,': 0.07; 'python': 0.09; 'cest': 0.09; 'clock,': 0.09; 'loop.': 0.09; 'bug': 0.10; 'advance': 0.10; 'obviously,': 0.16; 'subject:)?': 0.16; 'mon,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'fix': 0.17; '>>>': 0.18; 'feb': 0.19; 'meant': 0.21; 'stephen': 0.22; 'seems': 0.23; 'specifically': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.25; 'header :User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'am,': 0.27; 'andrew': 0.27; 'accidentally': 0.29; 'adjust': 0.33; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'list': 0.35; 'along': 0.35; 'pm,': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'subject: (': 0.36; 'ok,': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'notice': 0.39; 'list,': 0.39; 'your': 0.60; 'easy': 0.60; 'received:phx3.secureserver.net': 0.62; 'received:prod.phx3.secureserver.net': 0.62; 'p.s.': 0.63; 'respect': 0.63; 'different': 0.63; 'effective': 0.63; 'helping': 0.63; 'more': 0.63; 'subject': 0.66; 'apologize': 0.67; 'header :Reply-To:1': 0.68; 'ranges': 0.71; 'reply-to:no real name:2**0': 0.72; '2013': 0.84; 'true!': 0.84; 'received:173.201': 0.91; 'received:173.201.192': 0.91; 'besides,': 0.93; 'forever.': 0.93; 'spoke': 0.93 |
| Date | Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:47:31 +0000 |
| From | Andrew Robinson <andrew3@r3dsolutions.com> |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120909 Thunderbird/15.0.1 |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| To | python-list@python.org |
| Subject | Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? |
| References | <2e07acfb-4f48-4a27-9b06-3d8103325c0f@googlegroups.com> <kfhsc2$ubq$1@ger.gmane.org> <512ABA02.2080709@r3dsolutions.com> <CALwzid=Dobx0F1Gm3E-Oq0vZf8V6SaNmb3j4SBmty1DDAffwLg@mail.gmail.com> <512B15C0.8070106@r3dsolutions.com> <CALwzid=SscH6kcPXFGZL5Oh=rQDm=1yxZ6=mibdYssgHCGxcuw@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-Reply-To | <CALwzid=SscH6kcPXFGZL5Oh=rQDm=1yxZ6=mibdYssgHCGxcuw@mail.gmail.com> |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-BeenThere | python-list@python.org |
| X-Mailman-Version | 2.1.15 |
| Precedence | list |
| Reply-To | andrew3@r3dsolutions.com |
| List-Id | General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org> |
| List-Unsubscribe | <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| List-Archive | <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/> |
| List-Post | <mailto:python-list@python.org> |
| List-Help | <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help> |
| List-Subscribe | <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.2513.1361814583.2939.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
| Lines | 35 |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 2001:888:2000:d::a6 |
| X-Trace | 1361814583 news.xs4all.nl 6963 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:33793 |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@xs4all.nl |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.python:39901 |
Show key headers only | View raw
On 02/25/2013 04:54 PM, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Andrew Robinson > <andrew3@r3dsolutions.com> wrote: >>> Intuitively, it should result in an infinite loop starting at 0. But >>> ranges require a stop value for a very good reason -- it should not be >>> this easy to accidentally create an infinite for loop. >> ... >> and, besides, the same is true with other constructions of loops.... >> >> while a: # Damn easy, if a is accidentally true! > Notice I specifically said an "infinite *for* loop". OK, so tit for tat. Notice I already showed an effective *accidental* "infinite" for loop because I did notice you spoke about a *for* loop. And, obviously, in the case of the while loop I showed -- it was not meant to be True forever. It's a variable, which is subject to change. I really do respect your opinion; but it's one of about 5 people that dominate this list, albeit the same spend a lot of time helping others; Stephen is someone new to me, and I want to encourage his probing of the issue more than I want to advance my view. P.S. I apologize about the e-mail clock, it seems I am sending my local time again -- and it's different from your timezone; I *wish* the python list computer would politely adjust it when *accidents* happen, or my OS's distribution would fix their bug -- but cest la vie. I limp along with the status quo for now.
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-13 11:00 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-02-14 00:23 -0500
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-13 21:54 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-13 21:54 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-02-14 07:32 +0000
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-14 00:36 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-02-14 08:03 +0000
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-14 01:08 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-14 01:26 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-02-14 11:58 -0700
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-14 14:01 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-14 14:01 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-14 17:46 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-02-14 17:46 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-13 22:06 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-14 12:25 +0000
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? stephenwlin@gmail.com - 2013-02-14 07:56 -0800
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Andrew Robinson <andrew3@r3dsolutions.com> - 2013-02-25 01:10 +0000
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-02-25 03:28 -0700
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-02-25 06:23 -0500
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-02-25 09:54 -0700
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Andrew Robinson <andrew3@r3dsolutions.com> - 2013-02-25 09:47 +0000
Re: Suggested feature: slice syntax within tuples (or even more generally)? Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2013-02-26 07:38 +0000
csiph-web