Terji added the comment:
>> If there were special dunders __all__ and __any__ it would be easy to
>> encapsulate this behaviour inside the range objects themselves, and neither
>> any() nor all() would need to know anything about range objects.
This sounds very interesting
Terji added the comment:
>> Why should ``all()`` special case ``range``? Apart from showing off
>> benchmarks, what's the point?
Mostly to avoid silly mistakes, and the overhead of doing it would be very
small, so a very small trade-off.
>> Should ``any()`` also spec
New submission from Terji :
Checking if a range's items are ll truthy can be done y checking if 0 the range
contains 0, however currently Python iterates over the range, making the
operation slower than needed.
>>> rng = range(1, 1_000_000)
>>> timeit all(rng)
New submission from Terji:
It has become possible to create a ``NewType`` from an existing ``NewType``,
see https://github.com/python/mypy/pull/3465 and
https://github.com/python/peps/pull/271.
This is a small update to the documentation as a concequence of the above
change
