Please reject the PEP. More variations along these lines won't make the
language more elegant or easier to learn. They'd just save a few hasty
folks some typing while making others who have to read/maintain their code
wonder what it means.
--Guido
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Łukasz Langa <lukasz at langa.pl> wrote:
> The PEP is deferred because it seems that
>> while True:
> <code>
> if condition:
> break
>> is good enough. I agree. We should reject the PEP and summarise
> the status. Alternatively, the only way I think we can improve on
> the syntax above is something like this:
>> do:
> <code>
> if condition:
> break
>> or without a new keyword:
>> while:
> <code>
> if condition:
> break
>> The empty-predicate variant would let Python check whether there's
> actually a break in the body of the loop.
>> --
> Best regards,
> Łukasz Langa
>> WWW: http://lukasz.langa.pl/> Twitter: @llanga
> IRC: ambv on #python-dev
>> _______________________________________________
> Python-ideas mailing list
>Python-ideas at python.org>http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas>
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20130626/443ba35c/attachment-0001.html>
