<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Nick Coghlan <<a href="mailto:ncoghlan@gmail.com">ncoghlan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">One way to optimise this (since all we need to support here is counting rather than arbitrary arithmetic) would be for the longrange iterator to use some simple pure C fixed point arithmetic internally to keep track of an arbitrarily long counter, and only convert to a Python long when it has to (just like the optimised shortrange iterator).<br>
</div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Stop already! It was an ill-considered, throwaway comment, and I apologise</div><div>for making it.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
I'm not sure it is worth the hassle though.<div class="Ih2E3d"></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Indeed. Using such a large range is almost certainly not common enough to</div><div>make it worth optimising...</div>
<div><br></div><div>Mark</div><div> </div></div>