[Python-ideas] for/except/else syntax
debatem1 at gmail.com
Fri Oct 9 02:21:32 CEST 2009
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Gerald Britton <gerald.britton at gmail.com>wrote:
> The thing is, if you read the documentation, it is not misleading. It
> does just what it says it does. The problem Guido identified, is that
> too many folks don't read the documentation, but try to figure it out
> by reading examples. Small wonder they get confused!
Did you read the documentation before posting your examples?
Given that you use it often enough to "fight [...] tooth and nail"
over these proposals, I'm beginning to think that the construct
is confusing even with the benefit of regular use.
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Yuvgoog Greenle <ubershmekel at gmail.com>
> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 4:07 PM, George Sakkis <george.sakkis at gmail.com>
> >> Agreed. The more people disagree on how "for/else" should be spelled,
> >> the more I think there is no keyword that can encapsulate what it does
> >> unambiguously. Certainly "then" leaves me as clueless as "else" for
> >> the reasons above. I was thinking of something verbose like
> >> "elifnotbreak", but not only it is ugly, it is not 100% accurate; the
> >> correct spelling would be "elifnotbreakandnotreturnandnotexception" ;)
> > I agree with you on "then" giving no clues but I think you're wrong
> > about the spelling. The correct spelling would be "if not break".
> > x = y / z
> > if condition:
> > print(1,2,3)
> > The above code translated to "George Sakkis Language" should be spelled:
> > x = y / x
> > if condition and notreturnandnotexception:
> > print(1,2,3)
> > So because it's obvious that everything in python is under the
> > condition of "notreturnandnotexception", your point is moot.
> > The "else" in "for...break...else" is very simply a condition tested
> > after the loop finished (exactly like any other "if" that would
> > immediately follow the loop). The condition that's tested is simple:
> > "if there was a break - skip this".
> > So your spelling exaggeration doesn't worry me :). The fact that
> > python-ideas can't agree on a better syntax for python 4/5 does. I
> > appreciate the lesson taught, as Guido put it, but I think python can
> > have a long term plan concerning this old, rare and misleading syntax.
> > --yuv
> > _______________________________________________
> > Python-ideas mailing list
> > Python-ideas at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
> Gerald Britton
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas at python.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-ideas