Gerald Britton wrote:
> Please find below PEP 3142: Add a "while" clause to generator
> expressions. I'm looking for feedback and discussion.
This was already discussed on python-ideas where it got negative feedback.
One objection, mentioned by Mathias Panzerbock and Georg Brandl, is that
it is redundant with takewhile(). You did mention that in the PEP.
The other, posted by Steven Bethard, is that it fundamentally breaks the
current semantics of abbreviating (except for iteration variable
scoping) an 'equivalent' for loop. This should have been listed in the
PEP under Objections (or whatever the section. I did not bother to
second his objection there but will now.
-1
Steven summary:
"I'm probably just repeating myself here, but the reason not to do it
is that the current generator expressions translate almost directly
into the corresponding generator statements. Using "while" in the way
you've suggested breaks this symmetry, and would make Python harder to
learn."
Longer presentation:
"I think this could end up being confusing. Current generator
expressions turn into an equivalent generator function by simply
indenting the clauses and adding a yield, for example:
(i for i in range(100) if i % 2 == 0)
is equivalent to:
def gen():
for i in range(100):
if i % 2 == 0:
yield i
Now you're proposing syntax that would no longer work like this.
Taking your example:
(i for i in range(100) while i <= 50)
I would expect this to mean:
[meaning, one would expect this to mean, using current rules = tjr]
def gen():
for i in range(100):
while i <= 50:
yield i
In short, -1. You're proposing to use an existing keyword in a new way
that doesn't match how generator expressions are evaluated."
Terry Jan Reedy
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