Ah, thanks. Sorry, I don't know how I failed to see that.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Andre Roberge <andre.roberge@gmail.com>wrote:
I believe that the original suggestion was meant to be more general than
the specific suggestions for powers of 10. For example, consider the
following hypothetical:
for i in range(1, 1_111_111_111, 1024):
pass
where the _ really helps in figuring out the size.
André
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Kirubakaran <kirubakaran@gmail.com> wrote:
(fixed typo)
How about range(10**6) ?
- Kirubakaran.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Kirubakaran <kirubakaran@gmail.com>wrote:
How about range(10**60) ?
- Kirubakaran.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net>wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2011 23:06:18 +0200
"dag.odenhall@gmail.com"
<dag.odenhall@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6 May 2011 19:51, Matt Chaput <
matt-KKMwxO2wslj3fQ9qLvQP4Q@public.gmane.org> wrote:
Not sure if this has been proposed before: A syntax change to allow
underscores as thousands separators in literal numbers to improve
readability, e.g.:
for i in range(1, 1_000_000):
pass
I believe D allows this and while it's a small thing it really is
much more
readable.
Ruby too.
You could also use e-notation[1]: 1e6, in your example. In many
situations it's even more readable because you don't need to "count
the zeros". This is already supported in Python.
Yes, but it gives a float, not an integer:
> for i in range(0, 1e6): pass
...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: 'float' object cannot be interpreted as an integer
Regards
Antoine.
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Kirubakaran