On Tuesday 21 October 2003 06:34 pm, Skip Montanaro wrote: ... > would like to toss one of each. The list comprehension syntax seems the > more obvious (to me) syntax to keep while it would appear there are some > advantages to the lazy list comprehension semantics (enumerate (parts of) > infinite sequences, better memory usage, some performance improvements). Yes to both points. Hmmm... > should look at other alternatives which don't introduce new syntax, > including morphing list comprehensions into lazy list comprehensions or ...as long as this can be done WITHOUT breaking a ton of my code... > leaving lazy list comprehensions out of the language, at least in 2.x. As Eeek. Maybe. Sigh. 3 years or so (best case, assuming 2.4 is the last of the 2.*'s) before I can teach and deploy lazy comprehensions?-( Hmmm... what about skipping 2.4, and making a beeline for 3.0...?-) Alex
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