Maric Michaud wrote: > Another variant, I feel this one more natural as it doesn't contain a > C-looking infinite loop
doing things in a convoluted way because you think that non-infinite while- loops are not natural? you can get help for that, you know ;-) > Actually it's even more efficient than Lundh's one for smaller strings (less > than 1000 characters on my box) and slow down as strings go wider (slowly, > seems to be a logarithmic progression) due to the split call resulting in > creation of a new list. and a potentially large number of new strings. there's a lot of string copying going on in there... </F> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list