On 03:56 am, tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
There's a lot of things in Python that I don't strictly *need*. That
doesn't mean that they wouldn't be welcome if I could have them.
Getting rid of the range/xrange dichotomy would improve things.
The developers agreed a couple of years ago. Starting using 3.1 if you
want this.
And there was much rejoicing, et cetera.
Since 'range' could refer to a user-defined object, rather than the
builtin function, there is no way the interpreter should substitute
'xrange'.
See the earlier parts of this thread for the reasons this isn't true. :)
Jean-Paul
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
