On Tue, May 02, 2006, Nick Coghlan wrote: > Greg Ewing wrote: >> Josiah Carlson wrote: >>> >>> and am +0 on the double use below: >>> >>> for x in y: >>> for x in z: >> >> Can anyone think of a plausible use case for that? > > This really seems more like the domain of pychecker/pylint rather than > the compiler. The code may be a bad idea, but I don't see any reason > to make it a syntax error.
My sentiments precisely. Unless someone can come up with a good reason for changing the current semantics, I'm -1. Side note: if people do want to continue discussing this, I think it should go to python-3000. There is absolutely no reason to break currently-running code that happens to use this pattern. -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough they're yours." --Richard Bach _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com