On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 5:51 AM, Mikhail V <mikhail...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 4:12 AM, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 10:50 AM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> >> wrote: > >>>>> items[-0:] # failed parallel >> ['spam', 'ham', 'foo', 'bar', 'quux'] >> >> So you use -1 in slices to parallel 1 (unlike using ~1 as with >> indexing), and everything works *except zero*. Which means that the >> slice-assignment form of insert is easy to write, but the >> slice-assignment form of append isn't. >> >> Mikhail, if it were possible to append using slice assignment, would >> that meet the case? >> > > > How? like this: > > items[-0:] = [item]
Well, yes, except for the part where -0 is indistinguishable from 0. > One of main motivation is actually to have just 'item' on the right side. > So your idea is to have special syntax for 'last item' so as to avoid > something like: > > c = len(L) > L[c:c] = [...] > > But IIUC you're still about _iterable_ on the right-hand part? Yes, for consistency with other slice assignment. I don't think a dedicated syntax for slotting a single item into it has any chance of being accepted. (PLEASE NOTE: I am not Guido. [citation needed]) But I'm trying to find some germ of an idea inside what you're asking for, something that IS plausible. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/