On 2006-07-05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kay Schluehr: >> there is nothing really new or interesting or challenging. >> Micro-optimizations and shape lifting. > > I see. Maybe Python is becoming a commodity used by more than 10e6 > persons, so changellenges aren't much fit anymore. > Guido has tried to avoid the problems of Perl6, making Py3.0 a > improvement and not a revolution. The good thing is that we'll probably > see a beta version in 14-18 months. Py3.0 from being like fantasy is > become something close, this is a good thing. > I may ask you what you would like to see in Py3.0, but remember that > your answer may become ignored by the developers.
These are just some ideas. Whether they fit into python or not I will leave to the developers. 1) Literal slices, in a sense we already have these, but they are limited to indexing. You can't do something like fun(::). May be this means the notation used now has to be adapted. 2) Iterable slices. Allow (provided the slice notation stays:) for i in (1:10): ... to do the same as: for i in xrange(1,10): This will allow to get rid of both range and xrange. Xrange is totally unnecessary and range(a,b) becomes list(a:b). 4) Introduce Top and Bottom objects, which will allways compare greater/smaller to other objects. Make them the default values for the start and stop values of slices. 5) Give slices a "&" and "|" operator. 7) Give slices the possibility to include the stop value. My first idea here was that the notation of slices was adapted, so that what is a:b now would become a:|b. A slice to include the b would then be a::b. You could even have a slice that didn't include the a but included the b like: a|:b Now I expect a lot of resitance here, so it this seems not feasable, just drop it. 6) Is this is all asked too much, make slice at least subclassable. -- Antoon Pardon -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list