Comments on: Inclusive range() in Python

By: Abhinav Sood

Abhinav Sood — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 19:43:34 +0000

I’d suggest that you create an iterator like this:
class inclusive_range(): def __init__(self, *args): numargs = len(args)


        if numargs < 1:

            raise TypeError('Inclusive Range requires at least 1 argument')
        elif numargs == 1:

            self.stop = args[0]

            self.start, self.step = 0, 1
        elif numargs == 2:

            (self.start, self.stop) = args

            self.step = 1
        elif numargs == 3:

            (self.start, self.stop, self.step) = args
        else:

            raise TypeError('Inclusive Range expects at the most 3 arguments, got {}'.format(numargs))

def __iter__(self): i = self.start while i <= self.stop: yield i i += self.step

Then you can use it like an iterable object like range(). For example, for i in inclusive_range(5,100,5): print(i, end = ' ')

By: Abhinav Sood

Abhinav Sood — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 11:54:10 +0000

Nick’s solution will best serve the purpose and behaves exactly like range() of Python. That is, it can be passed 1, 2 or 3 arguments just like the range(). Anything else would raise an appropriate exception.

Example:
inclusive_range(25) for range from 0 to 25 inclusive with default step of 1.
inclusive_range(10,25) for range from 10 to 25 inclusive with default step of 1.
inclusive_range(10,25,5) for range from 10 to 25 inclusive with a custom step of 5.

inclusive_range and inclusive_range(1,10,1,32) will raise exceptions.

By: Geo

Geo — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:29:33 +0000

def inclusive_range(start, stop=None, step=1): if stop == None: start, stop = 0, start


    extension = -1 if step < 0 else 1

return range(start, stop + extension, step)

It’ll differ from range() in that a second argument of None will cause it to do a [0..N] range as in one argument. It’ll also throw somewhat different errors if you feed it strings or similar, but so do most of the other examples.

The other code probably communicates better, but this was fun to try to write concisely!

By: Nick

Nick — Wed, 08 Jun 2011 10:12:04 +0000

def inclusive_range(*args): numargs = len(args) if numargs < 1: raise TypeError("irange requires at least one argument.") elif numargs == 1: stop = args[0]; start = 0; step = 1; elif numargs == 2: (start,stop) = args step = 1 elif numargs == 3: (start,stop,step) = args else: raise TypeError("irange expected at most 3 arguments, got %s" % (str(numargs))) i = start if step == 0: step = 1 while i <= stop: yield i i += step

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:16:25 +0000

I think Chris’s definition is not quite right. Consider these calls:

range(1, 5, 3) => [1, 4] inclusive_range(1, 5, 3) => [1, 4, 7]

The inclusive range shouldn’t include 7, since it is strictly greater than 5.

I think this is one way to define the interface with the same semantics as the range() built-in other than changing the right bound to be inclusive:

def inclusive_range(*args): if len(args) == 1: start = 0 stop = args[0] step = 1 elif len(args) == 2: (start, stop) = args step = 1 elif len(args) == 3: (start, stop, step) = args else: raise TypeError("Expected 1-3 args, got", len(args)) if step > 0: return range(start, stop + 1, step) else: return range(start, stop - 1, step)

By: Kenny Katzgrau

Kenny Katzgrau — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:17:18 +0000

@ Comments 1 & 2:

Lol. That’s great — been there.

By: Wes Turner

Wes Turner — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 04:54:16 +0000

irange = lambda x,y,z=1: range(x,y+1,z)

By: Chris Brinker

Chris Brinker — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:21:26 +0000

Dern lack of preview :)
def inclusive_range(start, stop, step=1): return(range(start, stop+step, step))

By: Chris Brinker

Chris Brinker — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:20:29 +0000

You may want to consider a situation with a negative step as well, in which case it is just better to add the step (positive or negative) to the stop:

def inclusive_range(start, stop, step=1):
return(range(start, stop+step, step))

-Chris

By: Giuliani Vito, Ivan

Giuliani Vito, Ivan — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:41:51 +0000

goddamn… this is what happens when coding 8 hours straight on…