more fun with PEP 276

[James_Althoff at i2.com]

Nick Mathewson

>James_Althoff at i2.com wrote:
>
>> / and // weren't my first choice (< and <= were -- I'm still working
>> on that approach) but since they had the advantage of actually
>> *working* in this scheme, I just went with it.
>
>Did you see my post under the subject heading of
>  "An implementation of a variation on "for 1 <= i <= 10"  ?

Yes, I saw your original post -- and very nice work!  Good job.

I thought I spotted some difficulties with the shortcuts that were left
out: the one-sided relations.  I've been working on a variant that tries to
get the one-sided relations to work the way I want and adds a few twists of
its own.

I'll try to post it soon and you can have a look.

Jim