why no "do : until"?

[Bjorn Pettersen]

Peter Hansen wrote:

> Bjorn Pettersen wrote:
> > and you'll have half a dozen people jumping on your back telling you that
> > "while 1" is simple, intuitive, and is the only Pythonic way to do things
> > (you'll have half a dozen other people trying to come up with some clever
> > wrapper to solve the problem they think you have <wink>).
>
> That's hardly being fair.  I just checked back on the entire thread up
> to this point and, while I may have missed something, it doesn't appear
> that _anyone_ suggested 'while 1' is either simple or intuitive.

You forget how many of these we have a year... I believe the October/Novemeber
one included that comment. Are you saying you don't think "while 1" is neither
simple nor intuitive? (I think it's simple, but definitely not intuitive ;-)

> Various people have said it is the _idiomatic_ way of expressing the
> required structure in Python, but that's not the same as saying it's
> "Pythonic", IMHO.  I think that term is generally reserved for something
> without the trace of ugliness that many of us seem to agree is present
> here.

Yet, it seems to be referred to as a Pydiom, i.e. a Pythonic idiom....

> Neither did I notice anyone jumping on anyone else's back for suggesting
> alternatives to 'while 1', just people pointing out reasons those
> suggestions likely won't be implemented (such as for indentation issues).
>
> (Apologies in advance if calling you unfair seems to be an "ad hominem"
> attack.  The nature of the medium tends to make comments intended as
> merely sarcastic to appear much more personal than intended.
> Allowances need to be made when interpreting intent.)

Attacking a persons ideas or logic is of course fair game in any discussion,
attacking their intelligence, intention, competence, etc., while common on
usenet is something we've usually been isolated from on c.l.py (we're known as
the friendly group <wink>).

-- bjorn