On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 11:13:20AM +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
If we had followed the math precedent, instead of <other computer language>, we would have set builders, list builders, dict builders, and generator builders.
I was intending to suggest something like that back when comprehensions were first being discussed, but people raced ahead and adopted the term "comprehension" before I got the chance.
"List builder" and "dict builder" make a lot of sense, but "generator builder" not so much -- it *is* a generator, not something that builds a generator. In fact it doesn't build anything in the sense that the others do. So maybe "generator expression" is the best we could have done.
But [expr for x in seq] is a list, just as (expr for ...) is a
generator. If you don't believe me, try it:
py> type([x for x in (1,)])