2008/4/26, Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > First of all, should the length of range be completely constricted by > Py_ssize_t? (issue 2690) Since indexing already is constrained by > this, it would make sense to make the whole object live under that
What is range()? help(range) shows me that range "Returns an iterator that generates the numbers in the range on demand." Ahá! So, as ints are unbound in Python, I could easily do: >>> r = range(1,1000000000000000000000) *If* range() provides me the indexing facility (a nice feature to have, but in any means core to this function), it should allow me to index it completely, or at least, to Py_ssize_t. IOW, r[0] should work, even if r[9999999999999999999) doesn't. That is, to me, the range semantics that we should aim to. Regards, -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/ _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
