Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 12:51:58 +0100, Xavier Morel wrote: > > > For those who'd need the (0..n-1) behavior, Ruby features something that > > I find quite elegant (if not perfectly obvious at first), (first..last) > > provides a range from first to last with both boundaries included, but > > (first...last) (notice the 3 periods) > > No, no I didn't. > > Sheesh, that just *screams* "Off By One Errors!!!". Python deliberately > uses a simple, consistent system of indexing from the start to one past > the end specifically to help prevent signpost errors, and now some folks > want to undermine that. > > *shakes head in amazement*
Agreed. *IF* we truly needed an occasional "up to X *INCLUDED*" sequence, it should be in a syntax that can't FAIL to be noticed, such as range(X, endincluded=True). Alex -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
