Message70525
| Author | gvanrossum |
|---|---|
| Recipients | amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, facundobatista, gvanrossum, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan, pitrou |
| Date | 2008-07-31.17:39:29 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.005734162 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1217525972.27.0.749783626275.issue2690@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
On the issue of whether len(range()) should be allowed to be > sys.maxsize, I think this should be allowed. I think in the future we should change the __len__ protocol to allow unbounded lengths. Even today, I think range(10**100).__len__() should return 10**100 rather than raising an OverflowError, even if len(range(10**100)) raises OverflowError. I also think ranges should be introspectable, exposing their start, stop and step values just like slice objects. Probably all those changes are for post 3.0. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008-07-31 17:39:32 | gvanrossum | set | recipients: + gvanrossum, facundobatista, amaury.forgeotdarc, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan, belopolsky, pitrou |
| 2008-07-31 17:39:32 | gvanrossum | set | messageid: <1217525972.27.0.749783626275.issue2690@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008-07-31 17:39:31 | gvanrossum | link | issue2690 messages |
| 2008-07-31 17:39:29 | gvanrossum | create | |