[Python-Dev] PEP 340: Breaking out.

[Paul Moore]

On 5/5/05, Steven Bethard <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/5/05, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
> > And does your proposal allow for "continue EXPR" as supported by PEP
> > 340? I can't see that it could, given that your proposal treats block
> > statements as not being loops.
> 
> Read PEP 340 again -- the "continue EXPR" syntax is orthogonal to the
> discussion -- PEP 340 adds it for *all* for loops, so for loops with
> the non-looping block statements would also be able to use it.

I know this. But we're talking here about Nick's new proposal for a
non-looping block. All I am saying is that the new proposal needs to
include this orthogonal feature. If it's a modification to PEP 340,
that will come naturally. If it's a modification to PEP 310, it won't.
A new PEP needs to include it.

I am very much against picking bits out of a number of PEPs - that was
implicit in my earlier post - sorry, I should have made it explicit.
Specifically, PEP 340 should be accepted (possibly with modifications)
as a whole, or rejected outright - no "rejected, but can we have
continue EXPR in any case, as it's orthogonal" status exists...

> > The looping behaviour is a (fairly nasty) wart, but I'm not sure I
> > would insist on removing it at the cost of damaging other features I
> > like.
> 
> I don't think it "damages" any features.  Are there features you still
> think the non-looping proposal removes?  (I'm not counting orthogonal
> feautres like "continue EXPR" which could easily be added as an
> entirely separate PEP.)

I *am* specifically referring to these "orthogonal" features. Removal
of looping by modification of PEP 340 will do no such "damage", I
agree - but removal by accepting an updated PEP 310, or a new PEP,
*will* (unless the "entirely separate PEP" you mention is written and
accepted along with the non-looping PEP - and I don't think that will
happen).

Thanks for making me clarify what I meant. I left a little too much
implicit in my previous post.

Paul.