On 17 April 2017 at 04:00, Steve D'Aprano <steve+pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 05:49 am, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 02:48:08 +1000, Steve D'Aprano >> <steve+pyt...@pearwood.info> declaimed the following: >> >>>On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 11:57 pm, bartc wrote: >>> >>>> But people just don't want it. >>> >>>Damn straight. Now you get it. It's not about how easy it is to implement, >>>it's about whether it is needed and wanted. It isn't needed, and it isn't >>>wanted. >>> >> >> Let's go all the way, and just get rid of "while <cond>". > > Sure, why not? If it's your language, you can make it as minimalist or > maximalist as you like. You get to choose. >
I think it is right not to touch anything for .py file rules. Seriously there are much more problems, and better code editors should adress those, not current syntax. As for loops, well, if we speak of some 'my' language, it could be interesting whether there are common patterns. But is it on-topic here to speak of, say PyBasic2020 fantasy language? For real-time application development the amount of "while(condition)" vs "while True" can play bad jokes with readability. I would find such looping schema simpler: loop: if contitioin 1 : contitioin_break = 1 blabla bla = bla + foo make something make something if contitioin 2 : contitioin_break = 1 if contitioin 3 : contitioin_break = 0 if contitioin_break : *break /loop Anyway it is just question where to show this last line, or to make an emphasis on it. so I'd just leave it there, for me it helps when I imagine a cascade of functions and my eyes go down to the bottom. If I have kilometers of "if"s inside the loop, then hiding one line can become more a problem than an aid. Constructs like "repeat 100 times {}" or other sort of "let's pronounce it in English" found in some languages looks sort of confusing, it takes me time to "unwrap" their sense into a cascade especially when there are many different keywords. Mikhail -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list