On 16/11/2007, Benji York <benji at benjiyork.com> wrote: > > Gustavo Carneiro wrote: > > I am finding myself often doing for loops over a subset of a list, like: > > > > for r in results: > > if r.numNodes != numNodes: > > continue > > # do something with r > > > > It would be nice if the plain for loop was as flexible as list > comprehensions > > and allowed an optional if clause, like this: > > > > for r in results if r.numNodes == numNodes: > > # do something with r > > You can do the same today, sans sugar: > > for r in (s for s in results if s.numNodes == numNodes): > # do something with r Yes, I can do that, as well as I can use the 'continue' statement, but both versions are slightly more verbose and less clear than what I propose. -- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro INESC Porto, Telecommunications and Multimedia Unit "The universe is always one step beyond logic." -- Frank Herbert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20071116/28fd6ca5/attachment.htm
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