Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie James Vega
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:54:23PM +0200, Nikolai Weibull wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 15:16, Tony Mechelynck > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 22/10/08 13:57, Nikolai Weibull wrote: > > >> [...] I really dislike this tendency > >> computers have to not adhering to the mantra "do as I

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie Nikolai Weibull
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 17:06, Tony Mechelynck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It has everything to do with syntax. What you're talking about is semantics. There's a difference. > The documented syntax (at ":help remove()") says if {end} is before {idx} > it's an error. (Blurb condensed to the f

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie Nikolai Weibull
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 16:25, James Vega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:54:23PM +0200, Nikolai Weibull wrote: >> If I say remove(list, 8, -1) I expect it >> to give me a list of the first 8 elements in list. > This is odd since, as pointed out earlier, Bram modelled th

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie James Vega
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 05:06:55PM +0200, Tony Mechelynck wrote: > > On 22/10/08 16:25, James Vega wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:54:23PM +0200, Nikolai Weibull wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 15:16, Tony Mechelynck > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> On 22/10/08 13:57, Nikolai

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie Tony Mechelynck
On 22/10/08 16:25, James Vega wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 03:54:23PM +0200, Nikolai Weibull wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 15:16, Tony Mechelynck >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On 22/10/08 13:57, Nikolai Weibull wrote: [...] I really dislike this tendency computers have to

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie Nikolai Weibull
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 15:16, Tony Mechelynck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 22/10/08 13:57, Nikolai Weibull wrote: >> [...] I really dislike this tendency >> computers have to not adhering to the mantra "do as I mean, not as I >> say".[...] > Sorry, but in the programming world I don't follo

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie Tony Mechelynck
On 22/10/08 13:57, Nikolai Weibull wrote: > [...] I really dislike this tendency > computers have to not adhering to the mantra "do as I mean, not as I > say".[...] Well, nothing irks me more than when a stupid program tries to second-guess me and does something else than what I told it, on the

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie Nikolai Weibull
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 13:19, Doug Kearns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/21/08, Nikolai Weibull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list? >> >> Either way, what's the reasoning behind it doing

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-22 Fir de Conversatie Doug Kearns
Nikolai, On 10/21/08, Nikolai Weibull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list? > > Either way, what's the reasoning behind it doing so? If the items > aren't there to begin with, then great, that

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-21 Fir de Conversatie Tony Mechelynck
On 21/10/08 23:49, Matt Wozniski wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Tony Mechelynck wrote: >> On 21/10/08 13:53, Nikolai Weibull wrote: >>> Here's a patch: >> Please apply your patches to the latest version of the file. In eval.txt >> dated 2008 Sep 14, line, 4482 to 4489 are > ... >> withi

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-21 Fir de Conversatie Nikolai Weibull
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 22:29, Tony Mechelynck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 21/10/08 13:53, Nikolai Weibull wrote: >> Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list? >> >> Either way, what's the reasoning behind it doing so? If the ite

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-21 Fir de Conversatie Matt Wozniski
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Tony Mechelynck wrote: > > On 21/10/08 13:53, Nikolai Weibull wrote: >> Here's a patch: > > Please apply your patches to the latest version of the file. In eval.txt > dated 2008 Sep 14, line, 4482 to 4489 are ... > within the help for remote_send(); IOW your pointe

Re: Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-21 Fir de Conversatie Tony Mechelynck
On 21/10/08 13:53, Nikolai Weibull wrote: > Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list? > > Either way, what's the reasoning behind it doing so? If the items > aren't there to begin with, then great, that's precisely what I want. > > Th

Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list?

2008-10-21 Fir de Conversatie Nikolai Weibull
Has remove() always thrown an error if idx is beyond the end of list? Either way, what's the reasoning behind it doing so? If the items aren't there to begin with, then great, that's precisely what I want. The documentation should be updated to reflect this state of affairs.