On 4/16/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm really more interested in the general case where you have a test, and > then you have the results of the test. It would be nice to put the conditional > statement first, and then once you know that the test succeeded, start to > look at the specific details.
I think Skip's response applies equally here. This is an old chestnut; many folks have barked upon this tree in the last 15 years, without being able to crack this nut. Unless you have a concrete solution (short of allowing '=' in expressions :-) there's no solution and you're wasting everybody's time for explaining how useful it would be. This is different from e.g. unpacking syntax because that's a concrete solution, it just needs to be shown that the extra complexity added to the language is made up for by more readable code, and not offset by more bugs; or something like that. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
