Steven D'Aprano wrote: > John Zenger wrote: > >> I strongly agree that Python should promote range or xrange to syntax. >> I favor [0..10] rather than [0:10] because 0..10 is inherently easier >> to understand. > > "Inherently"? > > You mean people are born with an instinctive, unlearnt understanding of > ..?
I mean that most people will have seen that notation somewhere else in their pre-Python lives, so it won't take much effort for them to remember what it is, at least more so than 0:10. > With the > introduction of a single keyword, we could do this: > > for i in 2 to 5: > print i, > > which would print 2 3 4 5 This proposed syntax is also easy to understand, maybe more than "..", because it uses natural language. The only criticism is that it creates a list without using [] notation. How about [2 to 5]? > > (I'm open to arguments that it should be more Pythonic and less > mathematical, and halt at 4.) I am also open to such arguments but it will be tough to convince me that "x to y" should mean something different from what it means in Pascal, BASIC, and English. > > A second keyword "downto" would allow easy backwards loops, "Downto" would only be necessary if we wanted "[10 to 1]" to equal []. > and a third > "step" will absolutely kill any chance of Guido agreeing to this > whatsoever. What about [1 to 3 to 10]? (Or [1 to 10:2]?) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
