On Oct 3, 10:44 am, greg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So if anything were to be done to the language to > fix this, it really should be focused on fixing the > semantics of the for-loop. Unfortunately, the > fact that the loop variable leaks out of the scope > of the loop is regarded as a feature, so anything > which changes that seems to be a non-starter.
And Guido stated many times in the past that he is happy with the for loop as it is, so I don't think this will never change, even if the question keep getting asked here and there. Notice that even generator expressions, where the loop variable does not leak outside the loop, have the same behavior. The behavior of the list comprehension is a good test of how much functional a language is; Common Lisp and Python behaves in the same way (there is a single loop variable which is mutated at each iteration) wherea Scheme and Haskell introduce a new binding at each iteration. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list