Recap: PEP 276 Simple Iterator for ints

[William Tanksley]

On Fri, 16 Nov 2001 11:55:12 -0800, James_Althoff at i2.com wrote:
>William Tanksley wrote:
>>I've lost track of why we're arguing about this.  Why should we
>>make any change here?  What are we fixing?

>Nonetheless, as stated several times before, PEP 276 does not preclude the
>adoption of a new mechanism for specifying lists of numbers similar to any
>of the above proposals -- it doesn't have to be an "either or" choice. It
>simply provides a convenient way to access indexed structures in a
>for-loop.

So it's intended primarily as a way to iterate through the indices in a
list.  I think as such it should be part of PEP 212, which offers some
other ways of doing the same thing.

I don't like this, really.  It has severe effects on currently-legal
Python usage, and doesn't match with established Python behavior.

>Jim

-- 
-William "Billy" Tanksley