On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>
> That is, I'm OK with either not backporting anything at all, or
> backporting the full change. The only idea I object to is the one of
> removing the infinite iteration capability without providing a
> replacement spelling for it.
>
Is repeat('a') (omitting times argument) not a replacement spelling for it?
What about this alternative? Makes -1 consistently mean unlimited
repetition and other negative numbers consistently mean zero
repetitions then document this behaviour. Just throwing suggestion. I
am not so keen to it, though.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
