FWIW I'm against adding anything along these lines (the motivation is
the same as what I wrote before).

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:25 PM,  <jimjhb@aol.com> wrote:
> Just to clarify, PEP 315 had to do with a do-while concept (to make common
> use of pre-while code that
> often exists) and not  the (dubious) issue of:
>
> for X in listY while conditionZ:
>
> or
>
> for X in listY and conditionZ:
>
> (fwhile)
>
> Right?
>
> There seemed to be some confusion, but maybe they are related, but I'm not
> sure how....
>
> -Jim
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Łukasz Langa <lukasz@langa.pl>
> To: Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org>
> Cc: Python-Ideas <python-ideas@python.org>
> Sent: Wed, Jun 26, 2013 11:40 am
> Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] PEP 315: do-while
>
> On 26 cze 2013, at 17:03, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
>
> Please reject the PEP. More variations along these lines won't make the
> language more elegant or easier to learn. They'd just save a few hasty folks
> some typing while making others who have to read/maintain their code wonder
> what it means.
>
>
> Done. PEP 315 has been rejected.
>
> http://hg.python.org/peps/rev/21deefe50c51
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Łukasz Langa
>
> WWW: http://lukasz.langa.pl/
> Twitter: @llanga
> IRC: ambv on #python-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas@python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas@python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
>



-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)