Terry Reedy wrote:
"Nick Coghlan" <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote in message news:4828C59B.8070008@gmail.com... | I'd like to hear from Raymond before we do this. I'm pretty sure we had | a reason for *not* doing it that way in when enumerate() was added, but | I can't remember what that reason might have been...
Thanks. I think this part is the main reason I see a start argument to enumerate as potentially problematic: """all variants can easily be misread as starting at the nth item in the sequence (much like islice() does now): enumerate(3, 'abcdefg') --> (3,'d') (4,'e') (5, 'f') (6, 'g').""" Is the need to use zip(count(3), seq) for the offset index case really such a burden given the associated benefits in keeping the builtin function really simple and easy to understand? Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.boredomandlaziness.org