On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:

I think the only way to really fix this cleanly is to have
a different *syntax* for counting from the end, rather than
trying to guess from the value of the argument.

I was thinking the exact same thing today. Suppose the slice syntax was changed to:

[start:stop:stride:reverse]

where 0 or None or False for reverse leaves the slice in order while any True value reverses it. This would replace

'abcde'[2:5] == 'bcd'

'abcde'[2:5::True] == 'dcb'

'abcde'[::-2] == 'abcde'[::2:True] == 'eca'

'abcdef'[::-2] == 'fdb'

'abcdef'[::2:True] == 'eca'

As the last three examples, illustrate, sometimes the reverse is equivalent to a negative stride and sometimes it's not.

--- Bruce
I'm hiring: http://www.cadencemd.com/info/jobs

Latest blog post: Alice's Puzzle Page http://www.vroospeak.com

Learn how hackers think: http://j.mp/gruyere-security