On 28.06.2018 2:31, Greg Ewing wrote:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
The *very first* motivating example for this proposal came from a
comprehension.
I think it is both unfortunate and inevitable that the discussion bogged
down in comprehension-hell.
I think the unfortunateness started when we crossed over from
talking about binding a temporary name for use *within* a
comprehension or expression, to binding a name for use *outside*
the comprehension or expression where it's bound.
I've shown in <05f368c2-3cd2-d7e0-9f91-27afb40d5...@mail.mipt.ru> (27
Jun 2018 17:07:24 +0300) that assignment expressions are fine in most
use cases without any changes to scoping whatsoever.
So, as Guido suggested in
<CAP7+vJ+xBAT4ZvAo4B7qSqxnnpj8jJ1VZ-Le7EwT8=n-utj...@mail.gmail.com> (26
Jun 2018 19:36:14 -0700), the scoping matter can be split into a
separate PEP and discussion.
As long as it's for internal use, whether it's in a comprehension
or not isn't an issue.
Tim Peters has also given a couple of good examples of mathematical
code that would benefit strongly from this feature.
Going back a few months now, they were the examples that tipped me over
Well, I remain profoundly unconvinced that writing comprehensions
with side effects is ever a good idea, and Tim's examples did
nothing to change that.
--
Regards,
Ivan
_______________________________________________
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
