> On 20 Jul 2020, at 09:56, Alex Hall <alex.moj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 10:36 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas > <python-ideas@python.org <mailto:python-ideas@python.org>> wrote: > May I repeat: Spelling 'if break:' and 'if not break:' rather than say > 'on_break:' etc. would avoid adding new keywords. > > I don't know what to do about the zero iterations case, though. > > It could be that if `break` appears somewhere that an expression is expected, > it becomes an expression with the value 0 or 1 (or False or True) to indicate > the number of breaks that happened in the previous loop, and similarly some > other bit of code involving keywords can become the number of iterations of > the previous loop. This could be represented by `for`, `len(for)`, `pass`, > etc. So one might write: > > ``` > for x in ...: > ... > if not pass: > ... > elif pass == 1: > ... > else: > ... > ```
To avoid the ambiguity of if after for why not follow for with elif? for x in ...: ... elif break: # break was called elif not break: # looped at least once and break not used elif pass: # same as else today # loop'ed no times (I always have to think what else means after a for). Barry > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/N65ZZJPLN6LBPQOURDKJNXWGT64T3ZZK/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/QBT52KIMFB53HEPQV4CBUN7NPHUZEFL4/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/