On Tuesday 14 June 2005 12:07 am, Ron Adam wrote: > Terry Hancock wrote: > > On Monday 13 June 2005 11:09 pm, Ron Adam wrote: > >>My suggestion is to use, also as the keyword to mean "on normal exit" > >>'also' do this. > > Unfortunately, "also" is also a bad keyword to use for this, IMHO. > > I don't find it any more intuitive than "else". (And since your idea > > would break if-else code, I don't think it would be allowed, anyway). > > How would it break the current if-else?
I meant "for-else". Typo, sorry. The point is though, that there is a fairly strict rule against breaking old code, AFAICT. Which makes the issue academic, "for-else" will continue to mean what it currently does. > > I can't think of what would be a better keyword, though. :-/ > > Well there's 'not-else' or 'nelse' Ack! Just kidding of course. No, I know what it should be. It should be "finally". It's already a keyword, and it has a similar meaning w.r.t. "try". ISTM, that it would have to be a synonym for "else" though to be accepted on the backwards-compatibility criterion, and then it would be "more than one way to do it" which breaks the Zen. ;-) Personally, though, "for-finally" would make a lot more sense to me than "for-else" (and I don't have enough "for-else" code to worry about it breaking). -- Terry Hancock ( hancock at anansispaceworks.com ) Anansi Spaceworks http://www.anansispaceworks.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
