Jim Jewett wrote:
Gareth McCaughan wrote:

Some bit of my brain is convinced that [x in stuff if condition]
is the Right Syntax and keeps making me type it even though
I know it doesn't work.


(and I agree with Gareth)


On Monday 2005-03-14 12:42, Eric Nieuwland wrote:

The full syntax is:
[ f(x) for x in seq if pred(x) ]
being allowed to write 'x' instead of 'identity(x)' is already a shortcut, just as dropping the conditional part.


I think this is the heart of the disagreement.

Mentally, I'm not collecting some function of x (which happens
to be identity).  I am filtering an existing set.  Being able to
collect f(x) instead is just a useful but hackish shortcut.

Have it your own way, but if you happen to need a list of transformed elements of a filtered list (and that isn't an uncommon requirement) then the idea of selecting the set members and then transforming the copies as a separate step seems a little ... unnecessary.

Having to write

    [x for x in seq]

to produce a copy of a list doesn't seem that outrageous to me, and I don't find the predicate-less case of your proposal that convincing:

    [x in seq]

seems somehow too terse.

[...]

regards
 Steve
--
Steve Holden        +1 703 861 4237  +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC             http://www.holdenweb.com/
Python Web Programming  http://pydish.holdenweb.com/

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to