Re: [Python-ideas] Generator syntax hooks?

2017-08-08 Thread Stefan Behnel
Soni L. schrieb am 08.08.2017 um 01:56: > On 2017-08-07 08:35 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> Hi Soni, and welcome! >> >> On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 04:30:05PM -0300, Soni L. wrote: >> >>> What if, (x for x in integers if 1000 <= x < 100), was syntax sugar >>> for (x for x in range(1000, 100))?

Re: [Python-ideas] Pseudo methods

2017-08-08 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 7 August 2017 at 18:48, Victor Stinner wrote: > Ruby provides this feature. A friend who is a long term user of Rails > complained that Rails abuses this and it's a mess in practice. So I > dislike this idea. Right, Python's opinionated design guidance is to clearly

Re: [Python-ideas] Generator syntax hooks?

2017-08-08 Thread Guido van Rossum
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 8 August 2017 at 09:06, Chris Barker wrote: > > It would be nice to have an easier access to an "slice iterator" though > -- > > one of these days I may write up a proposal for that. > > An idea

Re: [Python-ideas] Generator syntax hooks?

2017-08-08 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 8 August 2017 at 09:06, Chris Barker wrote: > It would be nice to have an easier access to an "slice iterator" though -- > one of these days I may write up a proposal for that. An idea I've occasionally toyed with [1] is some kind of "iterview" that wraps around an

Re: [Python-ideas] Generator syntax hooks?

2017-08-08 Thread Stephen J. Turnbull
> Soni L. writes: > Steven d'Aprano writes: > > range(1000, 100) > > (x for x in range(1000, 100)) # waste of time and effort > Actually, those have different semantics! That's not real important. As Stefan Behnel points out, it's simple (and efficient) to get iterator