Paul Rubin wrote: > Look at the list.count() example at the start of this thread. > Diagnosing it isn't hard. Curing it isn't hard. It doesn't bloat > Python by an order of magnitude. A suitably factored implementation > might handle lists and strings with the exact same code and not incur > any extra cost at all. That type of thing happens all the time here. I believe the language creator use the "lack of" as a way to prevent/discourage that kind of usage. Just like the ternary operator(still don't know why it is finally accepted). It is not a problem(not having), it is a feature(to teach you program better), so what cure are we talking about ?
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
