Guido van Rossum wrote:
> How about, instead of trying to emphasize how different a
> block-statement is from a for-loop, we emphasize their similarity?
If you want to emphasise the similarity, the following syntax and explanation is
something that occurred to me during lunch today:
Python offers two variants on the basic iterative loop.
"for NAME from EXPR:" enforces finalisation of the iterator. At loop
completion, a well-behaved iterator is always completely exhausted. This form
supports block management operations, that ensure timely release of resources
such as locks or file handles.
If the values being iterated over are not required, then the statement may be
simplified to "for EXPR:".
"for NAME in EXPR:" skips the finalisation step. At loop completion, a
well-behaved iterator may still contain additional values. This form allows an
iterator to be consumed in stages.
Regardless of whether you like the above or not, I think the PEP's proposed use
of 'as' is incorrect - it looks like the variable should be referring to the
expression being iterated over, rather than the values returned from the iterator.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://boredomandlaziness.skystorm.net
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