Fredrik Lundh wrote: > the current > proposal stems from the observation that "for-loop plus generators" in > today's Python does in fact provide a block implementation that solves > many use cases in an elegant way. > > PEP 340 builds on this, sorts out a couple of weak points in the current > design, and adds an elegant syntax for most remaining use cases.
I still can't help feeling we're making a cart/horse ordering error here, though. Part of me regards the "for-loop plus generators" idea as an elegant hack, whose elegance only extends as far as it *doesn't* require anything beyond existing syntax and semantics. If new syntax and tricky new interactions with iterators are needed to support it, it doesn't seem so elegant any more. -- Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+ University of Canterbury, | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a | Christchurch, New Zealand | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc. | [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ 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
