Timeline for answer to Why are Python's slice and range upper-bound exclusive? by Nigel Tufnel
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 22, 2025 at 13:39 | comment | added | RARE Kpop Manifesto | this is the same Guido who was "swayed" by thinking everything should a statement, going against all common sense and common practice, then forced to add back an "assignment expression" operator when just about every other language gets that for free. | |
| Feb 3, 2023 at 18:06 | history | edited | wjandrea | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Spare the suspense. Add archive link.
|
| Oct 4, 2021 at 18:56 | comment | added | user3761340 | This explanation makes me feel a little bit better too; however, for a language designed to be readable, it might still be unforgivable... | |
| Apr 1, 2021 at 19:28 | comment | added | Jason Kelley | This is the only explanation I have seen that makes me feel better about it. This elegance is a non-arbitrary reason that finally gives me some peace. After all, it is called slicing and this makes it clear that the intent was for just that, not just subset selection. Thanks. | |
| Jun 17, 2019 at 15:17 | history | edited | Nigel Tufnel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 84 characters in body
|
| Jan 31, 2014 at 13:59 | history | answered | Nigel Tufnel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |