how to get the ordinal number in list

[Rustom Mody]

Having it both ways aren't you?

On the one hand you say

On Monday, August 11, 2014 3:21:35 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > Python is a formal language with a well-defined syntax and reasonably
> > well-understood semantics. That's all that matters. Any resemblance to
> > the much more ad-hoc syntax of classical mathematics is almost
> > coincidental.

> Well, it's a bit more than coincidence. It's the ELIZA effect:

> http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/E/ELIZA-effect.html

Which describes the Eliza effect as:
The tendency of humans to attach associations to terms from prior experience.

Then you continue:

> Using notations that some people will be familiar with is better than
> constructing brand new notations from scratch, even if not everyone
> can gain that benefit. (Which is an argument in favour of Python's
> percent-formatting of strings; there are plenty of people out there
> who'll instantly understand that %d will plop in an integer and %s a
> string - even some non-programmers know that notation, as it's found
> in config files, translation data, etc, etc.)

So evidently using notations in the ways they are conventionally used
is a good thing.

But then when it comes to Steven supporting the violation 500 years* of
math conventional usage of '=':

On Monday, August 11, 2014 2:45:48 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 23:22:45 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >> You think that the '=' sign not standing for math equality is ok.
> >> How come?
> > For the same reason that in the following:
> > [c.upper() for c in some_string if 'a' < c < 'x']
> > having the c symbol not stand for the speed of light is okay. Likewise,
> > in the sentence "I went to the park today", the symbol I doesn't mean the
> > element iodine. Symbols are context-dependent: the x in one equation is
> > not necessarily the same x in another equation, and the symbol = in one
> > context does not necessarily have the same meaning as in another context.

you are strongly approving.

You really need to decide which side you are on!

eg Marko disagrees but is fairly consistent: "Whether I like it or not, whether its
conventional or not... Quite irrelevant. Its formally defined. I follow the
definition. [Browser tabs stay open in case I slip]"

But you seem to be hopping between:

Its easy, its natural and thats why its so

and

Its the way it is... Take it or leave it

* Robert Recorde invented the '=' and introduced algebra to England in 1557
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Recorde#Publications