Antoon Pardon wrote: > On 2006-09-27, OKB (not okblacke) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Antoon Pardon wrote: >> >>> To begin with this already fails: >>> >>>>>> for i in xrange(Top): >>> ... print i >> >> What do you expect this to do? Loop forever? > > Yes that is what I would expect.
For unterminating loops, use while 1:, and if you need the counter, itertools.count(). > If someone would ask me > to implement a function like xrange it would look something > like the following (*) > > def xrange(start=1, stop, step=1): > > while start < stop: > yield start > start += step > > Since Top is supposed to be bigger than any other value this would > indeed loop forever. The only reason that this doesn't work with > the builtin, is because the builtin xrange insist on its arguments > being ints instead of allowing duck typing. xrange() *could* be implemented as shown above, but do you realize that it would be a severe performance hit compared to the current implementation, which doesn't give almost all users a benefit at all? Georg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
