On Jan 17, 7:13 pm, Paul Rubin <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> George Sakkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > And if the iterables don't necessarily support len(), here's a more > > general solution: > > Not trying to pick on you personally but there's this disease > when a newbie comes with a basically simple question (in this case, > how to solve the problem with ordinary lists) and gets back a lot > of complex, overly general "graduate level" solutions. Fair enough, although I don't think it's bad to show more general/ efficient/flexible solutions after the simple quick & dirty ones have been shown, as in this thread. My solution is just a step further from Paul Hankin's, not a direct response to the OP. > There's a humorous set of Haskell examples that takes this to extremes: > > http://www.willamette.edu/~fruehr/haskell/evolution.html Hehe.. I remember seeing a similar one for Java and "Hello world" using more and more elaborate abstractions and design patterns but I can't find the link. George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list