On 26/09/18 08:50, vito.detul...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Today I've added a couple of lines in my source code, and I'm very ashamed of it. it "runs", and I know what it does (for now), but it's "too clever". I have "abused" the "else" clause of the loops to makes a break "broke" more loopsfor i in range(10): print(f'i: {i}') for j in range(10): print(f'\tj: {j}') for k in range(10): print(f'\t\tk: {k}') if condition(i, j, k): break else: # if there weren't breaks in the inner loop, continue # then make anoter outer loop, break # else break also the outer one else: continue break the "magic" is in that repeated block... it's so convoluted to read... still it's very useful to omit "signals" variables or the need to refactor it in a function with an explicit return or other solutions. is there any chance to extends the python grammar to allow something like for i in range(10) and not break: print(f'i: {i}') for j in range(10) and not break: print(f'\tj: {j}') for k in range(10): print(f'\t\tk: {k}') if condition(i, j, k): break with the semantics of break a loop if an inner loop "broke"?
To me the Ned Batchelder presentation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnSu9hHGq5o "Loop like a Native" is the definitive way on how to deal with loops in Python.
-- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
