Top and Bottom Values [PEP: 326]
apardon at forel.vub.ac.be
Thu Sep 28 09:41:36 CEST 2006
On 2006-09-27, Tim Chase <python.list at tim.thechases.com> wrote:
>>> To begin with this already fails:
>>>>>> for i in xrange(Top):
>>> ... print i
>> What do you expect this to do? Loop forever?
> Perhaps the infinite loop should take half as long as
> >>> for i in xrange(Bottom, Top): print i
> Though then the values when the loop first starts are kinda
> ambiguous... :)
> Given the limits of xrange:
> >>> for i in
> ... print i
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
> OverflowError: long int too large to convert to int
> I suspect one would have an overflow condition to help break you
> out of the loop...
Sometime people want an infinite loop.
Personnaly I don't see why I should get an overflow error while
for i in xrange(sys.maxint - 4, sys.maxint + 5):
I remember in the days when longs and ints were being unified,
that some people complained, because without this unification,
a loop in which an int counter was incremented would necessarily
end when the counter overflowed and this was a good indication
there was a bug somewhere. The response to that was, that you
could never foresee how your algorithm would be used and that
maybe someday someone found a good way to use your algoritm
where the counter would go beyond sys.maxint.
Following this logic there is no reason why xrange should be
limited to ints.
> >>> try:
> ... for i in range(Top):
> ... print i
> ... except OverflowError:
> ... print 'done!'
> ...and then you time your instruction cycles and your disk reads
> so they fall under the read-head at just the right time... [*]
> [*] http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/story-of-mel.html
There is no reason to compare what I propose to the story of melvin.
All behaviour of the objects would be well defined and could be
easily understood to those who would read the documentation.
More information about the Python-list