<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
On 10/30/2012 10:29 PM, Michael Torrie wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:5090B743.4080507@gmail.com" type="cite">
As this is the case, why this long discussion? If you are arguing
for a
change in Python to make it compatible with what this fork you are
going
to create will do, this has already been fairly thoroughly
addressed
earl on, and reasons why the semantics will not change anytime
soon have
been given.
</blockquote>
<br>
I'm not arguing for a change in the present release of Python; and I
have never done so.<br>
Historically, if a fork happens to produce something surprisingly <u>useful</u>;
the main code bank eventually accepts it on their own. If a fork is
a mistake, it dies on its own.<br>
<br>
That really is the way things ought to be done.<br>
<br>
<blockquote>include this<br>
The Zen of Python, by <u>Tim Peters</u><br>
....<br>
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.<br>
Although <u>practicality beats purity</u>.<br>
....<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
Now, I have seen several coded projects where the idea of cyclic
lists is PRACTICAL;<br>
and the idea of iterating slices may be practical if they could be
made *FASTER*.<br>
<br>
These warrant looking into -- and carefully; and that means making
an experimental fork; preferably before I attempt to micro-port the
python.<br>
<br>
Regarding the continuing discussion:<br>
The more I learn, the more informed decisions I can make regarding
implementation.<br>
I am almost fully understanding the questions I originally asked,
now.<br>
<br>
What remains are mostly questions about compatibility wrappers, and
how to allow them to be used -- or selectively deleted when not
necessary; and perhaps a demonstration or two about how slices and
named tuples can (or can't) perform nearly the same function in
slice processing.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>