[Python-ideas] Simpler syntax for basic iterations

[Guido van Rossum]

Well, that's even more limited.

On Sunday, October 11, 2015, Luciano Ramalho <luciano at ramalho.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > Heh. "The whole point (15 years ago) of range() was to *avoid* needing
> > syntax to specify a loop over numbers." I guess I'm nothing if not
> > consistent. :-)
>
> Andre and I are not arguing for a special syntax to loop over numbers.
> We are arguing for special syntax to repeat a block a number of times.
> No indexing at all, and no variables need to be involved.
>
> for 3:
>      fd(100)
>      lt(120)
>
>
> Best,
>
> Luciano
>
> --
> Luciano Ramalho
> |  Author of Fluent Python (O'Reilly, 2015)
> |     http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920032519.do
> |  Professor em: http://python.pro.br
> |  Twitter: @ramalhoorg
>


-- 
--Guido (mobile)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20151011/cf65e280/attachment-0001.html>