Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net>: > > Last I checked, list comprehensions hadn't been accepted. I think > > there's at least one more debate waiting there... > > Check again, they're already checked in. The implementation may change > later, but the syntax has been decided (by Guido): > > [(x, y) for y in something for x in somewhere if y in x] Damn. That's unfortunate. With all due respect to the BDFL, I've come to believe that having special syntax for this (rather than constructor functions a la zip()) is a bad mistake. I predict it's going to come back to bite us hard in the future. -- <a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr">Eric S. Raymond</a> I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which grant[s] a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents. -- James Madison, 1794
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4