"Alex Martelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On 4/25/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... >> If list comprehensions didn't come first (and even though list >> comprehensions came first), I would argue that there should only be >> generator expressions. If one wants a list comprehension, one should >> use list(genexp). Obviously it would have clear implications of the >> non-starting of {genexp} for set, frozenset, and/or dict comprehensions. > > I entirely agree, as, it appears to me from his posts to this thread, > does Raymond; however, Guido thinks our shared preference is atypical, > as he posted on this thread 24 hours ago: > """ > On 4/24/06, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I dislike that as much as I dislike [<genexp>] as a shorthand for >> list(<genexp>), but I have no trouble admitting that if we have the >> [...] form, it's consistent to have the {...} one too. > > I think you're atypical in that dislike. > """ When Guido posted that, I replied in support of more syntax. While I don't share your dislike, Raymond and Josiah have somewhat neutralized my support. I can see Raymond's point that we now have too many types to support all with syntax. And I can see an argument that the appropriate response to more types is a compensating decrease in syntax (as in dropping [xx] as a synonym for list(xx)) rather than adding more.
Terry Jan Reedy _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
