Steve Holden wrote: > > This makes me wonder why we still don't have something like the unint > > function above in the standard distribution. > > > Because it's not what you'd call (or, at least, it's not what I'd call) > universally required. As you have shown it is relatively easy to hack > something supp when it's needed, so since it isn't something that's > required by the majority it hasn't been added to the library.
How about the symmetry argument? One can use int for radix 1 to 32 (I think) but for the reverse problem we only have hex or oct (and cannot choose symbol lists but that's not so very important, if the whole matter has any significance of course :-). Hey, unint might even win the "more general" approval! Anton "or maybe it's just because it's difficult to find a good name for it" -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
