Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: semicolon at end of python's statements
References: <1377735506.18906.15.camel@debian> <mailman.347.1377760274.19984.python-list@python.org> <1FETt.52607$Mw4.14965@fx15.am4> <CAPTjJmpBbf=BkZdeg3VdBYFvB0ADtyseGAMB214jJDyqZa=pmQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAA=1kxR_pT=MsUSSk0v-oij-0hSh0LEYrrP5i+5MukmcYfOGWA@mail.gmail.com> <7wob8gywds.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <mailman.385.1377858745.19984.python-list@python.org> <52213435$0$6599$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.458.1378068912.19984.python-list@python.org> <522446ae$0$2743$c3e8da3$76491128@news.astraweb.com> <52245E2F.4020909@rece.vub.ac.be> <52246BAD.9050403@gmail.com> <52246F4F.7080108@rece.vub.ac.be>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 19:44:33 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
From: "albert visser" <albert.visser@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52246F4F.7080108@rece.vub.ac.be>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux)
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.508.1378143885.19984.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 97
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:53515

On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 12:58:23 +0200, Antoon Pardon  =

<antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:

> Op 02-09-13 12:42, F=C3=A1bio Santos schreef:
>> On 09/02/2013 10:45 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>>> Op 02-09-13 10:05, Steven D'Aprano schreef:

[...]

>>>>
>>>> for item in seq: if cond:
>>>>      do_this()
>>>>      do_that()
>>>> else:
>>>>      do_something else()
>>>>
>>>> which is still nonsense but won't raise SyntaxError.
>>> Why shouldn't this raise a SyntaxError?
>>>
>> Because it would be parsed as a valid for .. else construct. Either t=
hat
>> or become ambiguous to the programmer, who would not be sure whether =
he
>> was writing an else clause for the `if`, or for the `for`.
>

[...]
>
> I also don't see how this would be that ambigous. The else
> lines up with the for, so it seems rather obvious for which
> he was writing an else clause.
>

My first association would be with the for, but someone could also be  =

thinking it's referring to the if on the same line, because there wouldn=
't  =

be any other way to write it (besides nesting the if).

I wouldn't like this syntax anyway, two colons and all.

When I first saw the idea of a nested for .. if construct the thing that=
  =

came to mind was another nesting, namely that of context managers. While=
 I  =

don't mind using

     with <context-1>:
         with <context-2>:
             do_stuff

I like being able to do e.g.

     with open('some_file') as _in, open('another_file', 'w') as _out:

because it makes it obvious that the context managers are related.
Expressing that the for and the if are related also appeals to me.
Another parallel might be slicing, where you can specify not only a star=
t  =

and an end value, but also an interval (which could be seen as a kind of=
  =

filtering condition).

I think that if you really want to show the "filtered for" as a somewhat=
  =

different concept than a for that just happens to have an if in its suit=
e,  =

that should be made visible.
Coming back to my first association mentioned above, why not use a comma=
?

for <identifier> in <iterable>, <condition>:
     <stuff>

(come to think of it, it has the added bonus that you won't get ambiguit=
y  =

what an else might be about).


Somehow this makes sense to me. But then, I also like 'x =3D y if  =

<condition> else z'.
Moreover, I'm Dutch (...)

Albert Visser
-- =

Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/