A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2000-August/008888.html below:

[Python-Dev] Lukewarm about range literals

[Python-Dev] Lukewarm about range literals [Python-Dev] Lukewarm about range literalsSkip Montanaro skip@mojam.com (Skip Montanaro)
Tue, 29 Aug 2000 09:55:49 -0500 (CDT)
One of the original arguments for range literals as I recall was that
indexing of loops could get more efficient.  The compiler would know that
[0:100:2] represents a series of integers and could conceivably generate
more efficient loop indexing code (and so could Python2C and other compilers
that generated C code).  This argument doesn't seem to be showing up here at
all.  Does it carry no weight in the face of the relative inscrutability of
the syntax?

Skip



RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4