On 25/07/2017 06:51, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 25 July 2017 at 02:23, Ben Hoyt <benh...@gmail.com> wrote:
This is more of a python-ideas discussion, and Steven's answer is good.
I'll just add one thing. Maybe it's obvious to others, but I've liked
for...else since I found a kind of mnemonic to help me remember when the
"else" part happens: I think of it not as "for ... else" but as "break ...
else" -- saying it this way makes it clear to me that the break goes with
the else. "If this condition inside the loop is true, break. ... *else* if
we didn't break, do this other thing after the loop."
For folks looking for a more in-depth explanation of the
"if-break-else" approach to thinking about this construct:
http://python-notes.curiousefficiency.org/en/latest/python_concepts/break_else.html
A helpful explanation.
But that it is necessary at all underlines that (IMHO) this use of
'else' is unnatural and hard to understand. I always have to think
twice about it, whether reading it or using it myself. Therefore I
would have preferred a more obvious keyword such as 'ifnobreak' (others
may think of something better).
But as has been stated, it's not going to change.
Rob Cliffe
That article also has a note explaining that we're unlikely to ever
change this:
http://python-notes.curiousefficiency.org/en/latest/python_concepts/break_else.html#but-couldn-t-python-be-different
Cheers,
Nick.
_______________________________________________
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
