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 -- Benji York http://benjiyork.com

I started thinking about itertools when I saw this then I realised that your question was about changing the syntax to produce fewer lines of code rather than writing more effiicient code.. seemed like a case where you could use ifilter. //Martin are talking about cvhanging the syntax rQuoting Gustavo Carneiro :

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

Has this idea come up before? Does anyone else like this idea?

-- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro INESC Porto, Telecommunications and Multimedia Unit "The universe is always one step beyond logic." -- Frank Herbert