[Python-Dev] listcomps vs. for loops
Michael Hudson
mwh at python.net
Tue Oct 21 10:45:00 EDT 2003
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Tue Oct 21 10:45:00 EDT 2003
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] listcomps vs. for loops
- Next message: [Python-Dev] listcomps vs. for loops
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jp Calderone <exarkun at intarweb.us> writes: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 12:41:00PM +0100, Michael Hudson wrote: >> Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> writes: >> >> > I don't recall what I said then. Did I say it was a feature that >> > >> > L = [x for x in R] >> > print x >> > >> > would print the last item of R? >> >> A problem with such code irrespective of anything else is that it >> fails when R is empty. >> > > Not when x is properly initialized. Obviously. > Anyway, this is no different from the > problem of: > > for x in R: > ... > print x Well, yes. I still think it's dubious code. > In any case, are there plans to also have the compiler emit warnings about > potential reliance on this feature? I would hope that we wouldn't make changes without emitting such a warning. I'm not sure how hard it would be to implement, tho'. (It would be /nice/ to implement a warning whenever there's a possibility of the UnboundLocalError exception, but that *definitely* requires control flow analysis and that is *definitely* a heap of work, unless the ast-branch gets some attention). Cheers, mwh -- We did requirements and task analysis, iterative design, and user testing. You'd almost think programming languages were an interface between people and computers. -- Steven Pemberton (one of the designers of Python's direct ancestor ABC)
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] listcomps vs. for loops
- Next message: [Python-Dev] listcomps vs. for loops
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list