On Sat, Mar 06, 2021 at 07:46:18AM +, David Mertz wrote:
> So this "research" is inherently doomed to fail UNLESS, you do the
> research not by actual raw timings, but rather in the sensible way of
> profiling the specific number of operations in an abstracted way.
Sorry, are you trying t
On Sat, 6 Mar 2021 at 07:52, Vincent Cheong wrote:
>
> So I thought, 'Why do we need to make a reversed copy to assign it to the
> original part, when we can simply reverse the original part itself.' That's
> the paradigm.
A few points strike me here:
1. The question you asked ("why do we need
I see.
You have coined the term exactly, partial-reverse. Nice. You have also put
forward a realistic question of 'why do we need'. Well, surely not everyone
needs it and definitely it's not urgently needed, but its just the
counterintuitive incompleteness such that 'it works for a whole, but n
On Sat, 6 Mar 2021 at 10:42, Vincent Cheong wrote:
>
> I see.
>
> You have coined the term exactly, partial-reverse. Nice. You have also put
> forward a realistic question of 'why do we need'. Well, surely not everyone
> needs it and definitely it's not urgently needed, but its just the
> count
Indeed, I understand.
Thanks for reply.
___
Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://ma
