Steven D'Aprano writes: > If your only argument is to continue to insist that Python should > have a shuffled() function and you'll write a patch, it will go no > where. First you have to convince people that the patch is needed.
It's not worth the effort. The previous attempt (issue26393) to get a shuffled function had a patch (which reduces to turning the expression "random.Random.sample(x, len(x))" into a function), and it was summarily rejected then, too. By different people, not quite evidence of a consensus, but put it this way: you're spitting into a gale. That patch gets 95%, btw ... it had docs, tests, and a NEWS entry first try. I'd want a few stylistic changes, but altogether a copacetic patch. Even so, no mercy was shown. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
