Please visit http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0204.html first.
As you can see, PEP 204 was rejected, mostly because of not-so-obvious syntax. But IMO the idea behind this pep is very nice. So, maybe there's a reason to adopt slightly modified Haskell's syntax? Something like [1,3..10] --> [1,3,5,7,9] (1,3..10) --> same values as above, but return generator instead of list [1..10] --> [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10] (1 ..) --> 'infinite' generator that yield 1,2,3 and so on (-3,-5 ..) --> 'infinite' generator that yield -3,-5,-7 and so on So, 1) "[]" means list, "()" means generator 2) the "start" is required, "step" and "end" are optional. Also, this can be nicely integrated with enumerations (if they will appear in python). Haskell is also example of such integration. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
