> [x,y for x in (1,2,3) for y in (4,5,6)]
Hm, I suppose the programmer meant the same as
[(x,y) for x in (1,2,3) for y in (4,5,6)]
Would it be really bad if we forced them to write it that way?
Side note: the suggested syntax here (for i in seq1 for j in seq2)
looks like a potential alternative for the currently proposed parallel
for loop syntax (for i in seq1; j in seq2).
Only problem: the for-for variant could be mistaken by someone used to
see nested loops as meaning the same as
for i in seq1:
for j in seq2: ...
Undecided and unhelpful,
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://dinsdale.python.org/~guido/)
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