larry at hastings.org
Sat Jul 29 20:48:37 EDT 2017
As previously requested: please take this discussion to python-ideas.
If you reply, remove python-dev from the To: and Cc: lists, and add
python-ideas instead. This speculative discussion was never appropriate
On 07/28/2017 03:11 PM, Rob Cliffe wrote:
> On 28/07/2017 20:57, MRAB wrote:
>> On 2017-07-28 10:17, Michel Desmoulin wrote:
>>> elif break and elif None: I'd like that very much. It's weird a break
>>> the semantic of break and None, but it's in such a dark corner of
>>> anyway I don't bother.
>> Surely it would not be "elif break", but "elif not break"?
> To me, anything beginning with "else" or "elif" suggests an
> alternative branch, not an additional one (YMMV):
> if condition:
> Therefore I would find "if not break" or even "and if not break" more
> Best wishes
> Rob Cliffe
>>> Le 27/07/2017 à 21:19, MRAB a écrit :
>>>> On 2017-07-27 03:34, Mike Miller wrote:
>>>>> On 2017-07-26 16:36, MRAB wrote:
>>>>>> "nobreak" would introduce a new keyword, but "not break" wouldn't.
>>>>> Whenever I've used the for-else, I've put a # no-break right next to
>>>>> it, to
>>>>> remind myself as much as anyone else.
>>>>> for...: not break: is the best alternative I've yet seen,
>>>>> congrats. Perhaps in
>>>>> Python 5 it can be enabled, with for-else: used instead for empty
>>>>> iterables, as
>>>>> that's what I expected the first few dozen times.
>>>> For empty iterables, how about "elif None:"? :-)
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> Python-Dev at python.org
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-Dev