[Python-ideas] Summary of for...else threads

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sun Oct 11 23:53:05 CEST 2009

Georg Brandl wrote:
> Nick Coghlan schrieb:
>> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>>> Unless there are serious objections, I intend to post this summary to 
>>>> python-dev in a couple of days and ask for a ruling on the various 
>>>> suggestions (e.g. Yes, No, Write A PEP And It Will Be Considered).
>>> 1. Excellent summary!
>>> 2. After the discussions, my personal opinion has settled down as +1 on
>>> retaining the status quo (but welcoming doc patches), +0 on
>>> warning-if-no-break and -1 on the other options.
>>> 3. This should probably go in a PEP regardless of the reaction from
>>> python-dev. Rejected PEPs provide a good record of things we have
>>> deliberately decided *not* to do.
>> Having just seen Guido's latest post (i.e. he would omit the feature
>> entirely if given the chance to redo the loop syntax and he's against
>> adding a syntax warning), I'd suggest proposing a "Rejected PEP for the
>> record" (with a link to Guido's post as the rejection).
> Would an entry in PEP 3099 suffice?

With links to Steven's summary and Guido's post? That would make sense
(and save anyone the effort of formatting a PEP).


Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list