[Chad Netzer]
> The main issue, as I see it, is substituting some form of lazy range
> iterator, for the range() function, "behind the curtains" as it were.
> People could gain the benefits of xrange() (less memory consumption,
> probably faster looping), without having to promote the continued use
> of xrange().
The SF patch manager has a workable implementation of your idea:
www.python.org/sf/738094 for i in range(N) optimization
The jury is still out on whether it is an elegant, brilliant patch or
a horrendous hack.
Raymond Hettinger
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