On 4/27/06, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [pep-3100 checkin]
> > {F(x) for x in S if P(x)} means set(F(x) for x in S if P(x)).
>
> I presume this means that there will never be dictionary
> comprehensions (as they would aspire to have an identical
> notation).
Why would that be necessary? Wouldn't
{F(x):G(x) for x in S if P(x)}
be unambiguous? (Not that I'm pushing for dict comprehensions -- I
just don't see how if Guido wants both dict and set comprehensions, he
couldn't have them.)
STeVe
--
Grammar am for people who can't think for myself.
--- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
_______________________________________________
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
