On 14/05/2020 19:56, Andrew Barnert wrote:
On May 14, 2020, at 10:45, Rhodri James<rhodri@kynesim.co.uk> wrote:
On 14/05/2020 17:47, Andrew Barnert via Python-ideas wrote:
Which is exactly why Christopher said from the start of this thread, and everyone else has agreed at every step of the way, that we can’t change the default behavior of slicing, we have to instead add some new way to specifically ask for something different.
Erm, did someone actually ask for something different? As far as I can tell the original thread OP was asking for islice-maker objects, which don't require the behaviour of slicing to change at all. Quite where the demand for slice views has come from I'm not at all clear. That doesn’t make any difference here.
If you want slicing sequences to return iterators rather than copies, that would break way too much code, so it’s not going to happen. A different method/property/class/function that gives you iterators would be fine.
We already have such. It's called itertools.islice(). I'm sorry, but you're missing the point here. You and Christopher seem to be having fun discussing this at great length, and that's fine. However at this point I've not grasped the proposal and I've lost the will to even contemplate the details. What I have grasped is that no one else has offered much opinion, so saying that "everyone else has agreed at every step of the way" doesn't actually have the weight it pretends to. -- Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd