[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Paul Rubin wrote: >>Look at the list.count() example at the start of this thread. >>Diagnosing it isn't hard. Curing it isn't hard. It doesn't bloat >>Python by an order of magnitude. A suitably factored implementation >>might handle lists and strings with the exact same code and not incur >>any extra cost at all. That type of thing happens all the time here. > > I believe the language creator use the "lack of" as a way to > prevent/discourage that kind of usage. Just like the ternary > operator(still don't know why it is finally accepted). It is not a > problem(not having), it is a feature(to teach you program better), so > what cure are we talking about ?
Sorry, but I still do not get it. Why is it a feature if I cannot count or find items in tuples? Why is it bad program style if I do this? So far I haven't got any reasonable explanation and I think there is no. -- Christoph -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
