On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:47:50AM -0400, Guido van Rossum wrote: [ xrange can't be changed into a generator ] > This is too bad; I really wish that xrange() could die or be limited > entirely to for loops. I wonder if we could put warnings on xrange() > uses beyond the most basic...? Why do we want to do this ? xrange() is still exactly what it was: an object that pretends to be a list of integers. Besides being useful for those who work a lot with ranges, it's a wondeful example on what you can do with Python (even if it isn't actually written in Python :-) I see less reason to deprecate xrange than to deprecate the gopherlib, wave/aifc/audiodev, mhlib, netrc and/or robotparser modules. -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
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