https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/8145
On 07.07.2018 3:33, Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote:
On 07.07.2018 2:58, Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev wrote:
On 07.07.2018 2:31, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 4:19 PM Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu
<mailto:tjre...@udel.edu>> wrote:
Since Guido, the first respondent, did not immediately shoot the
idea
down, I intend to flesh it out and make it more concrete.
Maybe I should have shot it down. The term is entrenched in multiple
languages by now (e.g.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_comprehension). Regarding "list
builder" one could argue that it would just add more confusion,
since there's already an unrelated Builder Pattern
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Builder_pattern) commonly used in
Java. (Though I worry about the presence of a Python example in that
Wikipedia page. :-)
According to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_comprehension#History, the term's
known from at least 1977 and comes from such influential languages as
NPL, Miranda and Haskell. So it's not you to blame for it :-)
Also, "generator builder" is not much more expressive than
"generator expression",
"generator builder" is simply incorrect. The GE doesn't "build"
generators, it's a generator itself. It's a generator _and_ an
expression. What could be a more obvious name?
This suggestion looks like coming from someone who hasn't quite
grasped generators yet.
and the key observation that led to this idea was that it's such a
mouthful to say "comprehensions and generator expressions".
Since "X comprehensions" are advertised as and intended to be
functionally equivalent to `X(generator expression)', I use just
"generator expressions" to refer to all.
That's accurate because the common part with the distinctive syntax
-- which is the thing referred to when addressing them all --
effectively _is_ a generator expression (the syntax differences in
the leading term are insignificant), what wraps it is of no concern.
So, no new terms are necessary, but someone who cares may add a note
to the docs to this effect.
Maybe it's not too late to start calling the latter "generator
comprehensions" so that maybe by the year 2025 we can say
"comprehensions" and everyone will understand we mean all four types?
https://docs.python.org/3/reference/expressions.html?highlight=comprehension#displays-for-lists-sets-and-dictionaries
Oh, I see. So, "comprehension" is actually the official term for this
"distinctive syntax", and the fact that "generator expressions" came
to use it is but a coincidence.
In that case, we can do a Solomon's decision: mention _both_ that
"comprehension" is the official term for the syntax in GE's reference
entry, _and_ the fact that "X comprehensions" are effectively wrapped
GEs in their reference entries.
Then everyone will learn both terminologies and could choose which is
more convenient to use.
FWIW more people should start using "list display" etc. for things
like [a, b, c].
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido <http://python.org/%7Eguido>)
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vano%40mail.mipt.ru
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vano%40mail.mipt.ru
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vano%40mail.mipt.ru
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
