Not to mention the item index, which is so often unused as in your example, as the first position in `for` loop bindings. Would it be so hard to have a `range_i

Not to mention the item index, which is so often unused as in your example, as the first position in `for` loop bindings. Would it be so hard to have a `range_indexed` version that includes the index? Maybe I don't write enough Go code, but I also tend to think the first item conveys more importance which is why I often double take when I read Go for loops. "Wait why are they ignoring... oh yeah it's just the index".