C.L. wrote: > James Stroud <jstroud <at> mbi.ucla.edu> writes: >> C.L. wrote: >>> I was looking for a function or method that would return the index to the >>> first matching element in a list. ... >>> ... __please don't be overly defensive__ ... >> The amount of typing wasted to defend design decisions such as this can >> boggle one's mind. Just use lists unless you have on overwhelming reason >> to do otherwise. >> >> James > > > Read the quote. I *am* using a list. > > That doesn't change the fact that this is unfriendly design. It's an ugly > inconsistent chunk of a Python's past in which built-in types didn't behave > like > objects. It sticks out like a sore thumb, maybe just not very often. > > Oh, and thanks for the insulting tone of your anticipated response. Have you > anything better to do with your time than wasting bytes writing empty > responses > to what you already deem a waste of typing? > > *sighs* just what I expected: another idle troll defending something just for > the sake of defending it. On the other hand, thanks 7stud, for the truly > helpful > response. >
I think you misinterpreted my post, I agree with you. Please read it again. You have touched on a very old topic. Many people have fought tooth and nail to defend arbitrary design decisions such as a tuple not having an index. It boils down to the fact that tuples are useless as a result unless you know you really need them--and you never really NEED them. James -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
