PEP 276 (was Re: Status of PEP's?)
philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk
Sat Mar 9 14:09:39 CET 2002
On 9 Mar 2002 05:38:20 GMT, Quinn Dunkan <quinn at pfennig.ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 4 Mar 2002 12:26:48 -0800, James_Althoff at i2.com <James_Althoff at i2.com>
>>Thanks for the explanation, below. Very interesting.
>>Yes, I agree with your basic analysis that producing an iterator for an
>>integer makes a lot more sense if one accepts integers as first-class
>>objects. The fact that Python treats integers as well as everything else
>>as first-class objects is one of the big reasons why I like Python so much.
>I have no trouble accepting integers as objects just like any other type, and I
>still don't like iter(5).
Nor do I, since it bdoes the same thing as range(5) and/or
One possibility might be a new looping construct, do:
print "this will be printed 5 times"
Note that you can't get hold of a do loop's loop variable. This
would be easy to optimise, I imagine.
<"><"><"> Philip Hunt <philh at comuno.freeserve.co.uk> <"><"><">
"I would guess that he really believes whatever is politically
advantageous for him to believe."
-- Alison Brooks, referring to Michael
Portillo, on soc.history.what-if
More information about the Python-list