On 07.07.2018 2:31, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 4:19 PM Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu > <mailto:tjreedy at udel.edu>> wrote: > > Since Guido, the first respondent, did not immediately shoot the idea > down, I intend to flesh it out and make it more concrete. > > > Maybe I should have shot it down. The term is entrenched in multiple > languages by now (e.g. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_comprehension). Regarding "list > builder" one could argue that it would just add more confusion, since > there's already an unrelated Builder Pattern > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Builder_pattern) commonly used in Java. > (Though I worry about the presence of a Python example in that > Wikipedia page. :-) According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_comprehension#History, the term's known from at least 1977 and comes from such influential languages as NPL, Miranda and Haskell. So it's not you to blame for it :-) > > Also, "generator builder" is not much more expressive than "generator > expression", "generator builder" is simply incorrect. The GE doesn't "build" generators, it's a generator itself. It's a generator _and_ an expression. What could be a more obvious name? This suggestion looks like coming from someone who hasn't quite grasped generators yet. > and the key observation that led to this idea was that it's such a > mouthful to say "comprehensions and generator expressions". Since "X comprehensions" are advertised as and intended to be functionally equivalent to `X(generator expression)', I use just "generator expressions" to refer to all. That's accurate because the common part with the distinctive syntax -- which is the thing referred to when addressing them all -- effectively _is_ a generator expression (the syntax differences in the leading term are insignificant), what wraps it is of no concern. So, no new terms are necessary, but someone who cares may add a note to the docs to this effect. > Maybe it's not too late to start calling the latter "generator > comprehensions" so that maybe by the year 2025 we can say > "comprehensions" and everyone will understand we mean all four types? > > FWIW more people should start using "list display" etc. for things > like [a, b, c]. > -- > --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido <http://python.org/%7Eguido>) > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev at python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/vano%40mail.mipt.ru -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20180707/1938b912/attachment.html>
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