On Wed, Sep 30, 2015, at 13:19, Neil Girdhar wrote:
I guess, I'm just asking for enumerate to go through the same change that range went through. Why wasn't it a problem for range?
Range has always returned a sequence.
Anyway, why stop there? Why not have map return a sequence? Zip? Anything that is a 1:1 mapping (or 1+1:1 in zip's case) could in principle be changed to return a sequence when given one. Who decides what does and doesn't benefit from random access?
Or sliceability. It wouldn't be hard, in principle, to write a general-purpose function for slicing an iterator (i.e. returning an iterator that yields the elements that slicing a list of the same length would have given), particularly if it's limited to positive values.