> If this ends in a stalement among the strongest proponents, it may not > be such a good idea after all. Don't worry, I really don't have any strong objection to either of these changes. They're only cosmetic, after all. It's still a good idea. Just one comment: even if the first clause *is* a 'for', there's no guarantee that the rest of the clauses have to have anything to do with what it produces. E.g. [x for y in [1] if z] The [x if y] case is only one of an infinite number of possible abuses. Do you still think it's worth taking special steps to catch that particular one? Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+ University of Canterbury, | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a | Christchurch, New Zealand | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc. | greg@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz +--------------------------------------+
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