2.3 list reverse() bug?

[Arthur]

>
>Hm, made sense to me. 

Well I don't mean to make a big thing of it, but mostly because it was
in response to a poster asking whether it was him or Python.  I think
the better answer is neither.  His intuition is informed by ealrier
experiences which presumably does not include vast experience with
Python, and Python is as it is.  And certainly a lack of intuitiveness
is not a general reproach that can be made in respect to Python, IMO.

Though it is mortal.
  
>When introduced to a system that follows different rules, our
>intuition will occasionally be at fault when it contributes to
>an invalid assumption.  

I guess.  I came to Python with little previous programming
experience. And chose, for example, not to study operator precedence.
But to rely on what made sense based on "intuition".  And was OK, 95%
of the time.  The other 5% was just learning what I might have
otherwise learned by a more deliberate contemplation of the
documentation - which is certainly clear and thorough enough on the
general subject. 

In some sense, making any assumption is a fault.  On the other hand, I
guess I am here because my approach worked for learning Python much
better than it did when making false starts at learning other
languages. 

>Seems to me it couldn't be otherwise

I agree,  But as a matter of degree, I like where Python is.

>
>Or better informed.  If you mean that in cases like the one that
>started this thread, one would just have to learn to ignore one's
>intuition, that doesn't sound like a happy state to me!

Better informed, in respect to the workings of Python.  Which in the
case of operator precedence is probably generically better informed.
In the case of mutablility, I am not sure.

Art