Martin v. Löwis @psf.upfronthosting.co.za wrote:

>> I'd propose this fix:
>>> -            args = args + v
>>> +            args = args + [x for x in search_matches]

I'v checked in the above yesterday, while the tracker machine was down.

>>> as the intention of the original patch was to use 'in' so any container 
>>> type would be possible. Richard, how does this look ?
> 
> If it is ok, I think there are a few less complicated spellings, such
> as
> 
>    args = args + list(search_matches)
>    args.extend(search_matches)

Ah, I didn't know the above were valid ways to get the same effect. In 
any case, I believe it's fixed in trunk now. Please confirm, so we can 
close this issue.

Thanks,
		Stefan