[Tim] >> To my eyes, this is genuinely harder to follow, despite its relative brevity: >> >> while total != (total := total + term):
[Antoine] > Does it even work? Perhaps if the goal is to stop when total is NaN, > but otherwise? I don't follow you. You snipped all the text explaining why it would work, so trying reading that again? When, e.g., `total` reaches 1.0 and `term` reaches 1e-30, this becomes: while 1.0 != (total := 1.0 + 1-e30): which leaves `total` unchanged (1.0 + 1e-30 == 1.0) and then while 1.0 != 1.0: causes the loop to exit (`while False:`). >> For that reason, the messages that sway me are those showing real >> code, or at least plausibly realistic code. In the majority of those >> so far, binding expressions would be a small-to-major win. > I'm sure it's possible to find thousands of line of code where binding > expressions wouldn't be a win, but I'm not sure that would be a > constructive use of mailing-list bandwidth. And that "argument" is? ;-) Note that I managed to move the PEP _away_ from general "assignment expressions" to the much simpler "binding expressions" precisely _by_ illustrating, via real code, why the generality of the former wasn't actually useful in any case I looked at. If something is always - or almost always - useless, that can be shown via considering realistic code. That was far more productive than endless abstract debates. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com