Raymond Hettinger wrote: > * easier to figure-out, look-up, and remember than either s[:]=[] or > del s[:]
Easier is an understatement - it's something you figure out automatically. When I want to do something w/ an object, looking at its methods (via code completion) is the very first thing. > * the OP is shocked, SHOCKED that python got by for 16 years without > list.clear() I'm sure you realize I was being sarcastic... > * learning slices is basic to the language (this lesson shouldn't be > skipped) Assigning to slices is much less important, and is something I always never do (and hence forget). > * the request is inane, the underlying problem is trivial, and the > relevant idiom is fundamental (api expansions should be saved for rich > new functionality and not become cluttered with infrequently used > redundant entries) I understand that these are the main arguments. However, as it stands there is no one *obvious* way to clear a list in-place. I agree that it's rare to even need it, but when you do a it's a little bit of a surprise. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
