Message352322
| Author | thejcannon |
|---|---|
| Recipients | akira, barry, mdk, pitrou, r.david.murray, thejcannon |
| Date | 2019-09-13.13:26:18 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1568381178.6.0.698003277985.issue21041@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> it may explain why negative indices or slices were initially not implemented: It already looks like the result of a slice. Sure the values of the sequence could be thought of as being increasingly smaller slices of some other sequence, however I don't think it changes the fact that "parents" is a sequence, and sequences have well-defined semantics for negative indices and slices. Semantics which people expect, and have to find smelly workarounds for. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2019-09-13 13:26:18 | thejcannon | set | recipients: + thejcannon, barry, pitrou, r.david.murray, akira, mdk |
| 2019-09-13 13:26:18 | thejcannon | set | messageid: <1568381178.6.0.698003277985.issue21041@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| 2019-09-13 13:26:18 | thejcannon | link | issue21041 messages |
| 2019-09-13 13:26:18 | thejcannon | create | |