""Martin v. Löwis"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] |> Just curious why 2to3 would not replace range() with list(range())? | | In most usages of range(), using the 3.0 range() will work just as | well, and be more efficient.
If so, which it would seem from range2x functionally equal to list(range3), then the suggestion of the subject line is backwards. What should be purged eventually is range in for statement headers (or list(range) after conversion). It seems that what some consider best practice now (make a list unless it is long and un-needed) is different from what will be best practice in Py3 (do not make a list unless actually need it). tjr
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
