steve21 <steve872929...@yahoo.com.au> added the comment: I already use the second version of the count function you give (without default arguments which I am not a big fan of). I'm not saying its difficult or unreadable to bypass itertools.count and write your own enhanced count function. But if I use a custom count function, you use a custom count function, and possibly many others too, then there could be a common requirement for a step argument and it might be a good idea too make it more widely available.
Haskell has a powerful and concise list notation, some of which Python has already borrowed from: multiple3 = [3,6..] _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue5032> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
