On Apr 24, 2007, at 4:47 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: > On 2007-04-24, Michael Bentley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Apr 24, 2007, at 1:39 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> >>> I suspect that if you give this explanation to someone and explain >>> that there is also a step parameter, chances are he will answer >>> correctly if you ask him, what he thinks the following will result >>> in: >>> >>> >>> "This is an example line"[12:19:2] >>> >>> >>> >>> If you ask him what the following will result in: >>> >>> "This is an example line"[19:12:-1] >>> >>> Chances are he will give the wrong answer. >> >> To be honest, bro -- I'd expect him to have enough intelligence to >> experiment for a second and figure it out. This isn't rocket science >> -- you can plainly see what's happening -- so learn it and move >> on. > > I don't think that the possibility to experiment and see for oneself > is a good reason to keep a possible confusing explanation in a > tutorial.
It's only potentially confusing if you already know more than has been presented and are in fact, *experimenting* with techniques that have yet to be presented. >> Or better yet, quietly submit a patch... > > Why should I? If the reactions would have been one of agreement that > this is confusing and that the explanation should be changed, I would > have considered submitting a patch. > > But most people that reacted seem to defend the current text in some > way or another. So if most people seem to feel there is no need for > a change why should I then submit a patch? ... or even continue the thread? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
