[Python-ideas] Simpler syntax for basic iterations

[Guido van Rossum]

It's not very compelling. So let's drop it.

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

> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:43 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > Well, that's even more limited.
>
> Yep. That's the whole point.
>
> >
> >
> > On Sunday, October 11, 2015, Luciano Ramalho <luciano at ramalho.org
> <javascript:;>> 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)
>
>
>
> --
> 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/20151011/5192d2fe/attachment.html>