RetroSearch Browse

Sat Mar 15 05:10:01 CET 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-March/077597.html

Sure. The 3.0 range() isn't exactly the same as the 2.6 xrange(), so
it would have to be a proper backport (sorry, I don't recall the exact
difference, but I remember it's been redone, perhaps to support long
integers).

It seems pretty minor though. The advantage of using xrange() is that
you remain backwards compatible all the way to 2.0 and probably even
1.5.2...

On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 8:14 PM, Eric Smith
<eric+python-dev at trueblade.com> wrote:
> In the keynote, Guido mentioned switching from range to xrange in 2.6
>  code, as a migration strategy.  Another option would be to add range to
>  future_builtins, and have it call xrange.  Would that be desirable?

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-March/077597.html below:

[Python-Dev] range in future_builtins?