Apologies for self-replying
On 12/01/16 08:24, Erik wrote:
On 12/01/16 07:13, Cameron Simpson wrote:
The former. Almost any loop _might_ be executed zero times. Compilers
and linters etc should only complain if they can prove the loop is
always executed zero times.
I was just raising the
possibility that the bug could have been that the loop was (incorrectly)
determined to be executed zero times for some reason.
Having just read it again, I note that Skip said he'd changed the |= to
something different (and I've since read the solution to the question).
I had misread what Skip said to mean he had added a new line _after_ the
'for' loop which touched the variable.
E.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
