RetroSearch Browse

Wed Jul 26 19:36:22 EDT 2017 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-July/148765.html

On 2017-07-26 23:55, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info 
> <mailto:steve at pearwood.info>>wrote:
> 
>     Hello Kiuhnm, and welcome.
> 
>     On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 05:35:03PM +0200, Kiuhnm via Python-Dev wrote:
>     > Hello,
>     >
>     > I think that the expression "for...else" or "while...else" is completely
>     > counter-intuitive.
> 
> 
>     You may be right -- this has been discussed many, many times before. In
>     my personal opinion, the best (and only accurate!) phrase would have
>     been:
> 
>     for item in sequence:
>          # block
>     then:
>          # block
> 
> 
> IMO,
> 
> for item in sequence:
>      # block
> nobreak:   # or perhaps `if not break:`
>      # block
> 
> would be clearer (if the syntax is necessary at all).
> 
[snip]

You couldn't have "if not break:" because that would look like the start 
of an 'if' statement.

"nobreak" would introduce a new keyword, but "not break" wouldn't.

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2017-July/148765.html below:

[Python-Dev] for...else