On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 17:04 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote: > Some years ago there was a long discussion about extending > the for-loop to express parallel iteration over a number > of iterables, which ended with the conclusion that such > an extension was syntactically impossible, and the creation > of zip(). > > Slightly too late for consideration, I did come up with > what I believe is a backwards-compatible syntax extension > to support this: > > for (x in iter1, y in iter2): > ... > > This is currently a syntax error, so there is no clash > with existing semantics. > > I'm mentioning it here again just in case anyone wants > to consider it for Py3k. I still believe it would be > nice to have a direct syntax for parallel iteration > to avoid the overhead of using zip or iterzip.
Does this save any overhead, other than the mental state of programmers? Cheers - Adam DePrince _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
