Status of PEP's?

[Greg Ewing]

James_Althoff at i2.com wrote:
> 
> > "for something" loops over all values of the variable that make
> > "something"  true.
> 
> But that kind of definition isn't comprehensive enough because, for
> example, it says nothing about the order of the variables as processed by
> the for-loop.

Obviously it doesn't serve as a complete *definition* of
the semantics, but the complete definition is at least
consistent with that view, for both "for i in x" and
"for x < i < y".

-- 
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, University of Canterbury,	  
Christchurch, New Zealand
To get my email address, please visit my web page:	  
http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~greg