Thomas Wouters writes: > As I already wrote Barry, I'll do this one -- but only if it's a no-brainer. > The patch is already written and I hadn't heard complaints about the syntax, > but now I hear some rumbling about how it should be a generator instead of a > list constructor. I don't feel like digging into that particular dungball, > though, having no experience what so ever with iterators, generators or Don't confuse being the PEP shephard with being the implementor, though *having* an implementation is important. Who does it is secondary. Can't the implementation be to create an xrange object instead of a list? Seems easy enough on first glance. But then, I've been carefully ignoring that whole discussion. ;) -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at beopen.com> BeOpen PythonLabs Team Member
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