On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 07:02:06PM -0400, Barry A. Warsaw wrote: > > >>>>> "TW" == Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> writes: > > TW> I agree that all this together looks dodgy, but I think there > TW> is a simple way to view it... I still think > > TW> 'for x in a; y in b:' > > TW> is the right syntax for parallel for loops. It's almost "only" > TW> syntactic sugar for > > TW> 'for x,y in map(None, a, b)' > > But wouldn't some variation on > > for x, y in a, b: > > invoke resonance with the classic idiom? Okay, now I'm reduced to > arguing syntax (and syntax which I haven't thought out much :). for x, y in a, b: won't work. "a, b" is a tuple constructor. The for-loop will iterate over a two-item tuple, and unpack each item (a and b) into the x,y variables. Try again or punt :-) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
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