On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 12:57 -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
> 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.)Can I unwithdraw PEP 274 now? <wink> -Barry
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ 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
