Re: Is this PEP-able? fwhile

References	<8D03F2B8CF0E7BE-1864-1796B@webmail-m103.sysops.aol.com> <8D03F312C70D2EF-1864-17DF3@webmail-m103.sysops.aol.com>
From	Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date	2013-06-25 09:58 -0600
Subject	Re: Is this PEP-able? fwhile
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.3834.1372175976.3114.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:33 PM,  <jimjhb@aol.com> wrote:
> Ian,
>
> Regarding your first message breaks are anathema (for many) and your other
> alternative is complicated.
>
> Regarding your second post, anding of lists is allowed, but generally
> returns non-utile results, but point taken.
> I guess technically it could be the last statement, with the condition just
> being ListD in your example.  To make
> the condition more complex (in your example) you'd have to add parens.

I'd probably have gone with the first "and".  The condition is more
likely to use ands than the iterable, and also I expect it would be
easier to parse with the simple rule that the first "and" divides it.
The ambiguity is nonetheless a black mark against the syntax.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Is this PEP-able? fwhile Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-06-25 09:58 -0600

csiph-web