On Mon, Oct 17, 2016, at 16:12, Paul Moore wrote:
And finally, no-one has even *tried* to explain why we need a third way of expressing this construction. Nick made this point, and basically got told that his condition was too extreme. He essentially got accused of constructing an impossible test. And yet it's an entirely fair test, and one that's applied regularly to proposals - and many *do* pass the test.
As the one who made that accusation, my objection was specifically to the word "always" - which was emphasized - and which is something that I don't believe is actually a component of the test that is normally applied. His words, specifically, were "a compelling argument needs to be presented that the new spelling is *always* preferable to the existing ones"
List comprehensions themselves aren't even always preferable to loops.