Thomas Wouters added the comment:
Well, that's not quite how I implemented the slicing, and it's also not
how the existing simple-slicing was implemented: A negative start index
is taken to mean 0, and a stop index below the start index is taken to
mean 'the start index' (leading to an empty slice.)
However, it isn't too hard to do what I think you want done: a negative
index means indexing before the pointer, not from the end of the
pointer, and missing indices are only okay if they clearly mean '0'
('start' when step > 0, 'stop' when step < 0.)
So:
P[5:10] would slice from P[5] up to but not including P[10],
P[-5:5] would slice from P[-5] up to but not including P[5],
P[:5] would slice from P[0] up to but not including P[5],
P[5::-1] would slice from P[5] down to *and including* P[0]
but the following would all be errors:
P[5:]
P[:5:-1]
P[:]
P[::-1]
Does that sound like what you wanted?
_____________________________________
Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue1617699>
_____________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
