[Python-ideas] Simpler syntax for basic iterations

[Mark Lawrence]

On 13/10/2015 18:59, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
> On 13.10.2015 00:21, Ben Finney wrote:
>> Since this is quite clearly expressed in existing Python syntax with::
>>
>>      for __ in range(3):
>>          forward(100)
>>          turn_left(120)
>>
>> the single use case doesn't IMO argue for benefit sufficient to overcome
>> the enormous burden of new syntax.
>
> I still like instead of the cryptic __ or _
>
> for each in range(3):
>      dosomething
>
> To me, that reads like a normal English statement.
>
> Best,
> Sven

No thanks.  The current situation has suited the Python community for 25 
years give or take, so if it ain't broke, there's no way it's going to 
get fixed, thank goodness.  Can we move on please?

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence