rtilley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well, it turns out to be the best way to invert a string, IMO. The > reversed() feature returns a reversed object... not a reversed > string. In short, I have to fool with it again _after_ it has been > inverted. The slicing takes care of the job right away and gives me > what I want... no Computer Sciencey <reversed object at 0xb6f6152c>> > to deal with :)
Oh, I see. I thought I'd tested reversed(...) but I guess I didn't. I'm going senile. reversed makes an iterator. Anyway, slicing is one solution; the array module is another. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
