On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 02:59:14PM +1200, Greg Ewing wrote: > Trent Mick suggested: > > > [for x in [10,20,30]: for y in [1,2,3]: x+y] > > When designing the syntax, I decided to put the target > expression first, because I wanted it to read declaratively. > Also I think it's clearer when you can see right up front > what it's going to be a list *of*. > Yes, I expressed liking someones (MAL's? Skip's?) suggested: [for x in [1,2,3]: x] Over the currently favoured [x for x in [1,2,3]] However, given Tim's response to that thread (list comprehensions are declarative, the important thing is for the synxtax to be memorable after initial familiarity), I am inclined to retract my opinion and support: [x for x in [1,2,3]] and its ilk. Mainly, I don't want to get pulled into the debate. It has been debated and there are too many cooks in the kitchen. Trent -- Trent Mick TrentM@ActiveState.com
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