Re: [RFC] Define proper semantics for range() function

> > I've changed the behaviour to throw a ValueError if a negative step is > provided with increasing range and accept negative steps for decreasing > ranges. > I am not sure this is better. This would introduce a BC break because now it's not as easy to avoid the error as you can't just wrap the variable in abs() call. I am not sure why we are even treating this as an error. It looks to me like PHP already copes with this whether it's a positive or negative number. If we just want to inform the user that the sign has no meaning, we can raise a Notice and leave it at that. It's not wrong that the step is negative, it's just a pointless sign.