PEP 284, Integer for-loops
usenet at microtonal.co.uk
Sat Mar 9 11:51:00 CET 2002
Tim Legant wrote:
> Out of curiosity I ran a couple of quick greps over the TMDA source.
> TMDA doesn't really fall into either of your "alternative" categories;
> it's small, but definitely not throwaway and it's an application, not
> a core library. It's a mail processor to eliminate SPAM. However,
> it's pure Python; there's no integration with C or Java.
How small is small? I have a script at
<http://www.microtonal.co.uk/temper.py> with around 1490 lines (including
comments and blank lines) and 35 uses of range, some probably evil, most
for for loops. Two warty examples
for n in range(1,n+1,2):
for element in range(firstIndex, maxBasis+1):
where the +1 is used for inclusive boundaries. 7 straight
> The results were that I found 52 or 53 'for' loops (scanned the
> results of the grep by eye, since the word 'for' appears in comments
> as well) and exactly no uses of [x]range at all.
I have 107 instances of the word "for", which may include comments.
> So either Jason and I are significantly better than you and your team
> at expressing ourselves naturally in Python <wink> or it's the need to
> interface with Java that's forcing you to use integer indices all the
> time. I'm betting big money on the latter.
Well, I've stuck my head above the parapet. Have a look at the code, and
see if I'm expressing myself badly. It doesn't integrate with C, Java or
COM but does do a lot of work with integers. That's not something Python
excels at, but it's such a good language generally that it's still worth
using outside its niche.
I still don't see a need for language changes, but I can see that people
doing heavier number theory than me would.
More information about the Python-list