Re: Numeric for loop with rationals

[Vadim Peretokin <vperetokin@...>]

What is the point of this email to the thousands of people exactly?

Let's keep the list productive please.

On Tue, 30 Jan 2018, 3:44 am Coda Highland, <chighland@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 6:21 PM, nobody <nobody+lua-list@afra-berlin.de> wrote:
> On 2018-01-30 01:11, Soni "They/Them" L. wrote:
>>
>> (Python doesn't have numeric for at all so it doesn't count.)
>
>
> So you're saying the numeric for is too much of a special case and should be
> removed?
>
> -- nobody
>

I think it's more of a "could be" rather than a "should be".

Also, there's a delicious pun in there.

/s/ Adam