Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.freenet.ag!takemy.news.telefonica.de!telefonica.de!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.001 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'interpreter': 0.05; 'subject:Python': 0.06; 'correct.': 0.07; 'interpreter.': 0.07; 'boring': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject:language': 0.09; 'python': 0.11; 'jan': 0.12; '127': 0.16; 'agree.': 0.16; 'language)': 0.16; 'non-ascii': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'reedy': 0.16; 'sense,': 0.16; 'subject: \n ': 0.16; 'symbols': 0.16; 'language': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'thu,': 0.19; 'meant': 0.20; '(the': 0.22; '>>>': 0.22; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; 'issue,': 0.24; 'specify': 0.24; 'unicode': 0.24; 'academic': 0.26; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'am,': 0.29; 'relative': 0.30; 'statement': 0.30; 'subject:list': 0.30; 'code': 0.31; 'complete,': 0.31; "d'aprano": 0.31; 'steven': 0.31; 'yes.': 0.31; 'class': 0.32; 'text': 0.33; '(i.e.': 0.33; '"the': 0.34; 'version': 0.36; 'really': 0.36; 'are,': 0.36; 'useful': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'starting': 0.37; '(3)': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'does': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:org': 0.40; 'skip:u 10': 0.60; 'received:173': 0.61; 'course': 0.61; 'first': 0.61; 'skip:n 10': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'detail.': 0.68; 'statement,': 0.68; 'default': 0.69; 'papers': 0.78; 'researchers': 0.78; 'subject:this': 0.83; 'continuum': 0.84; 'received:fios.verizon.net': 0.84 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Terry Reedy Subject: Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 06:43:12 -0400 References: <9daf0806-02de-4447-964c-c8f8953c23e5@googlegroups.com> <87ior3w740.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <5334c38e$0$29994$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <53364327$0$29994$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <53365F55.2040302@gmail.com> <533836c4$0$29994$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <533e811a$0$29993$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-173-75-254-207.phlapa.fios.verizon.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 In-Reply-To: <533e811a$0$29993$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 41 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1396608212 news.xs4all.nl 2945 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:40119 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:69665 On 4/4/2014 5:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:38:13 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote: > >> On 4/1/14 5:33 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: >>> If you narrowly meant "The python interpreter only starting using >>> unicode as the default text class in 3.0", then you are, in that narrow >>> sense, correct. I really should have said "3.0 was the first version of Python (the language) to specify that code and strings are unicode" >> Yes. When I speak of 'python' I am almost always speaking about the >> interpreter. > > Which interpreter? Since the unicode change is a language and not an interpreter issue, it does not matter. > Unicode is completely uninteresting to comp-sci. Whether strings > contain 127 symbols or 1114112 or 2 is just a boring detail. Until CS researchers want to write academic papers with non-ascii symbols ;-). >> On the python unicode continuum version (3) is more useful than >> version (2). ( this is of course relative and debatable, so the >> statement is rhetorical ) > > Now that's funny. I agree. > You make a completely non-controversial statement, that > Python 3's Unicode implementation is more useful (i.e. more functionally > complete, fewer design flaws, more efficient) than Python 2's, and *that* > is the claim that you smother to death in disclaimers. -- Terry Jan Reedy