Martin Blais wrote:
> Hi
>
> Just wondering, would anyone think of it as a good idea if the
> enumerate() builtin could accept a "start" argument? I've run across
> a few cases where this would have been useful. It seems generic
> enough too.
+1, but something more useful might be a a cross bet
Andrew Koenig wrote:
>> Sure, that would work. Or even this, if the scheduler would
>>automatically recognize generator objects being yielded and so would run
>>the the nested coroutine until finish:
>
>
> This idea has been discussed before. I think the problem with recognizing
> generators a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Neal> This URL should work for a while longer.
>
> Neal> http://creosote.python.org/neal/
>
> Ah, the vagaries of URL redirection. Thanks...
The front of his shirt says ++ungood; Is that the whole joke or is the
punchline on the back?
-Michel
_
On Tuesday 22 February 2005 03:01 am, Guido wrote:
>
> BTW, there's *still* no sign from a PEP 246 rewrite. Maybe someone
> could offer Clark a hand? (Last time I inquired he was recovering from
> a week of illness.)
Last summer Alex, Clark, Phillip and I swapped a few emails about reviving the
> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:38:05 -0500
> From: "Phillip J. Eby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 246: lossless and stateless
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: "Clark C. Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, python-dev@python.org
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; ch
On Monday 10 January 2005 09:58 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 07:46:39 -0800
> From: Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 246, redux
> To: Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "Clark C.Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Python Dev
>
