André wrote: > An extended slice of list x of length n in the form x[j:k:i] selects > every i-th element starting with and including the element at index j
This makes it sound like the index of 10 should be inclusive. > When either index is missing or lies outside of the > list bounds, the minimum or maximum inclusive index is used > automatically. So does that mean that the example actually is wrong, and Python is compensating? I tried numbers[9:0:-2] and it returned the same value as if I had used 10 as the first index, so perhaps 10 shouldn't be there after all. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
