From 2aa6c861f61d1c38e31f9b208ef7161bdf4383e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Raymond Hettinger Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 17:56:40 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Remove the revrange() proposal. --- pep-0322.txt | 11 ----------- 1 file changed, 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/pep-0322.txt b/pep-0322.txt index 9c46cefbe..a0ef0be75 100644 --- a/pep-0322.txt +++ b/pep-0322.txt @@ -159,17 +159,6 @@ library and comments on why reverse iteration was necessary: underlying list is altered during iteration. -Active Alternative -================== - -A simpler, but limited alternative is to create a builtin that takes -the same arguments as *range()* but returns a reverse iterator over the -range. The idea is that much of the benefit of *reversed()* comes -reducing the intellectual effort it takes to express the arguments for -[x]range() when going backwards. A good name is needed for this -alternative -- *revrange()* is cleanest so far. - - Rejected Alternatives =====================