Heiko Wundram wrote: > Xavier Morel wrote: > >>While the deprecation of xrange is not that "soon", it is part of the >>Python 3000 PEP (http://www.python.org/peps/pep-3000.html#id38) along >>with the deprecation of most FP-facilities of Python (filter, map, >>reduce). > > I know this, and that's one of the reasons I'm a little at odds with Python > 3000... There are many good things in there (such as removing the > FP-facilities which are much more clearly and cleverly implemented using > generator- and list-comprehensions), but some things are so basic (such as > xrange) I wouldn't want to have to implement them every time I need such a > beast. > > Unless of course range() becomes "more clever" and returns an iterator in > case the amount of memory to store the needed range is too large, which > would of course mean obfuscation at other places...
I believe range() will always return an iterator in Python 3000. See the first item in the section "Built-In Changes" on http://wiki.python.org/moin/Python3.0. xrange() will be going away because it will be utterly obsolete in every conceivable way. -- Robert Kern [EMAIL PROTECTED] "In the fields of hell where the grass grows high Are the graves of dreams allowed to die." -- Richard Harter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list