Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

"Peter Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Dave Hansen wrote: >> So lose the "if." >> >>R = C then A else B I think that part of the argument for the "A if C else B" syntax is that "then" is not currently a reserved word. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 02:15:40 -0400, Chris Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> "Sebastian" == Sebastian Bassi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >Sebastian> On 9/30/05, Reinhold Birkenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next >>> versio

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

> "Duncan" == Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Duncan> Chris Smith wrote: >> What I really want to do is take four lines of conditional, and >> put them into one, as well as blow off dealing with a 'filler' >> variable: >> >> return "the answer is " + "yes" if

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 21:49:15 +0200, Piet van Oostrum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Hansen) (DH) wrote: > >>DH> So lose the "if." > >>DH>R = C then A else B > >>DH> I don't think python uses the question mark for anything. Throw that >>DH> in, if it makes parsing ea

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Hansen) (DH) wrote: >DH> So lose the "if." >DH>R = C then A else B >DH> I don't think python uses the question mark for anything. Throw that >DH> in, if it makes parsing easier: >DH>R = C ? then A else B We have already had this discussion several times.

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Dave Hansen wrote: > So lose the "if." > >R = C then A else B It would be nice (in my opinion) if this were the way it was going to be. Having one of the two results come first makes that result seem somehow of primary importance, while the conditional (which in my mind is far more import

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Chris Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >What I really want to do is take four lines of conditional, and put >them into one, as well as blow off dealing with a 'filler' variable: > >return "the answer is " + "yes" if X==0 else "no" I would write this as: return "the answer is " + ("yes" if X==0 e

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 13:02:20 +0200, Piet van Oostrum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Paul Rubin (PR) wrote: > [...] > >>PR> Yeah, "if C then A else B" is a ancient tradition stretching from >>PR> Algol-60 to OCAML, and who knows what all else in between. I'm not >>PR>

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 01:06:30 -0400, "George Sakkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >"Dave Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:42:34 -0500, Terry Hancock >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >On Sunday 09 October 2005 07:50 am, phil hunt wrote: >> >> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:05:1

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Chris Smith wrote: > What I really want to do is take four lines of conditional, and put > them into one, as well as blow off dealing with a 'filler' variable: > > return "the answer is " + "yes" if X==0 else "no" > > > Or whatever the final release syntax is. The syntax is fine, but the seman

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

> Paul Rubin (PR) wrote: >PR> Reinhold Birkenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> For a conditional, syntax must be found, and the tradition of Python >>> design is not to use punctuation for something that can be solved with >>> keywords. >PR> Yeah, "if C then A el

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

> "Sebastian" == Sebastian Bassi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Sebastian> On 9/30/05, Reinhold Birkenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next >> versions of Python there will be a conditional expression with >> the following syn

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Paul Rubin wrote: > Reinhold Birkenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > For a conditional, syntax must be found, and the tradition of Python > > design is not to use punctuation for something that can be solved > > with keywords. > > Yeah, "if C then A else B" is a ancie

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Op 2005-10-10, Terry Hancock schreef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sunday 09 October 2005 07:50 am, phil hunt wrote: >> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:05:12 -0500, Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >GvR's syntax has the advantage of making grammatical sense in English (i.e. >> >reading it as written p

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Dave Hansen wrote: > And Basic, and Fortran, and Lisp, and just about any programming > language you care to name, including python (if Condition: Affirmative > else: Negative). > > Not to mention that the sequence is identical to execution order. > It's just plain goofy to have to scan to the midd

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

"Dave Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:42:34 -0500, Terry Hancock > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >On Sunday 09 October 2005 07:50 am, phil hunt wrote: > >> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:05:12 -0500, Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >GvR's syntax has the advantage

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Sebastian Bassi wrote: > I don't understand why there is a new expression, if this could be > accomplished with: > > if C: > X > else: > Y > > What is the advantage with the new expression? It actually is an expression, whereas your example shows a statement (so "this" could _not_ be accompli

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On 9/30/05, Reinhold Birkenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python > there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: > X if C else Y I don't understand why there is a new expression, if this could be accomplis

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:42:34 -0500, Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sunday 09 October 2005 07:50 am, phil hunt wrote: >> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:05:12 -0500, Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >GvR's syntax has the advantage of making grammatical sense in English (i.e. >> >read

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Sunday 09 October 2005 07:50 am, phil hunt wrote: > On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:05:12 -0500, Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >GvR's syntax has the advantage of making grammatical sense in English (i.e. > >reading it as written pretty much makes sense). > > I know, let's re-write Python to

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005 01:05:12 -0500, Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >GvR's syntax has the advantage of making grammatical sense in English (i.e. >reading it as written pretty much makes sense). I know, let's re-write Python to make it more like COBOL! That's bound to be a winner! -- E

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Fri, 07 Oct 2005 18:24:28 +0100, Robin Becker wrote: > Eric Nieuwland wrote: > >> >> >> Ever cared to check what committees can do to a language ;-) >> > > well there goes democracy :( For fans of Terry Pratchett's Discworld series, there is: Vimes had once discussed the Ephebian i

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Friday 07 October 2005 10:52 am, Fredrik Lundh wrote: > Terry Hancock wrote: > > GvR's syntax has the advantage of making grammatical sense in English (i.e. > > reading it as written pretty much makes sense). > > as a native Python speaker, I find that argument being remarkably weak. > things

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Eric Nieuwland wrote: > > > Ever cared to check what committees can do to a language ;-) > well there goes democracy :( -the happy slaves eat and are contented-ly yrs- Robin Becker -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Terry Hancock wrote: > GvR's syntax has the advantage of making grammatical sense in English (i.e. > reading it as written pretty much makes sense). as a native Python speaker, I find that argument being remarkably weak. things I write in Python should make sense in Python, not in some other lan

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On 07/10/05, Eric Nieuwland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ever cared to check what committees can do to a language ;-) +1 QOTW. -- Cheers, Simon B, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.brunningonline.net/simon/blog/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Friday 07 October 2005 08:56, Eric Nieuwland wrote: > Ever cared to check what committees can do to a language ;-) *has nasty visions of Java* Hey! Stop that! - Michael -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Robin Becker wrote: > As mentioned earlier only a dictator can make such decisions and of > course as > with many dictatorships the wrong decision is often made. There's no > such thing > as a benevolent dictatorship. Ever cared to check what committees can do to a language ;-) --eric -- htt

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

As mentioned earlier only a dictator can make such decisions and of course as with many dictatorships the wrong decision is often made. There's no such thing as a benevolent dictatorship. -- Robin Becker -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Monday 03 October 2005 03:48 am, Volker Grabsch wrote: > Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > /... snip comment that the natural order is C, X, Y and that programmers > > that > > care about readable code will probably want to be extremely careful with > > this > > new feature .../ > > That's also my opi

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Christophe wrote: > Michael a écrit : >> Rocco Moretti wrote: >> >> >>>That is, what would happen with the following constructs: >>> >>>A if B else C if D else F >>>A if B if C else D else F >> >> >> The correct answer should be the person who wrote it would get told off >> for writing code th

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Ron Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >So ... > > A if B else C + X * Y > >Would evaluate as... ? > > A if B else (C + X * Y) """In general, 'if' and 'else' bind less tight than everything except lambda.""" http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056846.html -- \S -- [EMAI

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Michael a écrit : > Rocco Moretti wrote: > > >>That is, what would happen with the following constructs: >> >>A if B else C if D else F >>A if B if C else D else F > > > The correct answer should be the person who wrote it would get told off > for writing code that a person reading would have n

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Op 2005-09-30, Sam schreef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > This is a MIME GnuPG-signed message. If you see this text, it means that > your E-mail or Usenet software does not support MIME signed messages. > The Internet standard for MIME PGP messages, RFC 2015, was published in 1996. > To open this message

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Fredrik Lundh wrote: > /... snip comment that the natural order is C, X, Y and that programmers that > care about readable code will probably want to be extremely careful with this > new feature .../ That's also my opinion, but OTOH, Guido's syntax is more close to the syntax of list comprehension

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Paul Rubin wrote: > I'm not > sure what Guido saw in the "A if C else B" syntax but it's not a big deal. Maybe Guido's done some perl programming on the side? When I've been doing perl programming I've quite liked the if (...); construct, however, on occasion it's been desirable to have an e

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Rocco Moretti wrote: > That is, what would happen with the following constructs: > > A if B else C if D else F > A if B if C else D else F The correct answer should be the person who wrote it would get told off for writing code that a person reading would have no idea what the code was doing (wi

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:28:26 -0400 Terry Reedy wrote: > > The lesson for me is to spend much less time on Python discussion and much > more on unfinished projects. So even if I never use the new syntax, I will > have gained something ;-) QOTW? -- jk -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinf

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: > Ron Adam >>I think I'm going to make it a habit to put parentheses around these >>things just as if they were required. > Yes, that's the best way to make it readable and understandable. > > Reinhold Now that the syntax is settled, I wonder if further discussion

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Leif K-Brooks writes: Sam wrote: And "foo if bar" is Perl-ish; yet, even Perl has the ? : operators. What _isn't_ Perl-ish? BASIC? pgp7WNg5zZz7a.pgp Description: PGP signature -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Sam wrote: > And "foo if bar" is Perl-ish; yet, even Perl has the ? : operators. What _isn't_ Perl-ish? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Reinhold Birkenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For a conditional, syntax must be found, and the tradition of Python > design is not to use punctuation for something that can be solved with > keywords. Yeah, "if C then A else B" is a ancient tradition stretching from Algol-60 to OCAML, and who k

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Sam wrote: > Jaime Wyant writes: > >> On 9/30/05, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Reinhold Birkenfeld writes: >>> >>> > Hi, >>> > >>> > after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of >>> > Python >>> > there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: >>>

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Erik Max Francis wrote: > Dave Benjamin wrote: > >> Hooray! After years of arguing over which syntax to use, and finally >> giving up since nobody could agree, the Benevolent Dictator did what >> only a dictator can do, and just made a damn decision already. >> >> Thank you, Guido! =) > > Yes,

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Ron Adam wrote: >> It will be >> >> A if B else (C if D else F) > > So this evaluates as if there are parentheses around each section.. Hmm? > >(A) if (B) else ( (C) if (D) else (F) ) > > The first 'if' divided the expr, then each succeeding 'if' divides the > sub expressions, etc... ? >

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Jaime Wyant writes: On 9/30/05, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Reinhold Birkenfeld writes: > Hi, > > after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python > there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: > > X if C else Y > > which is the same as today

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

"Dave Benjamin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hooray! After years of arguing over which syntax to use, and finally > giving up since nobody could agree, I understand that this has become the local 'politically correct' view, but as a participant in the discussion, I know it not true and actively dece

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:25:35 +0200, Reinhold Birkenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Fredrik Lundh wrote: >> Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: >> >>> after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python >>> there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: >>> >>>

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

On 9/30/05, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Reinhold Birkenfeld writes: > > > Hi, > > > > after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python > > there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: > > > > X if C else Y > > > > which is the same as today's >

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: > Rocco Moretti wrote: > >>Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python >>>there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: >>> >>>X if C else Y >> >>Any word on chaining? >> >>

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Reinhold Birkenfeld writes: Hi, after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: X if C else Y which is the same as today's (Y, X)[bool(C)] What's wrong with "C ? X:Y"? Aside from ":" being overl

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Dave Benjamin wrote: > Hooray! After years of arguing over which syntax to use, and finally > giving up since nobody could agree, the Benevolent Dictator did what > only a dictator can do, and just made a damn decision already. > > Thank you, Guido! =) Yes, hear hear. So what made him change

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Rocco Moretti wrote: > Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: >> Hi, >> >> after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python >> there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: >> >> X if C else Y > > Any word on chaining? > > That is, what would happen with the

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: > after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python > there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: > > X if C else Y Hooray! After years of arguing over which syntax to use, and finally giving up since nobody could agree,

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: > Hi, > > after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python > there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: > > X if C else Y Any word on chaining? That is, what would happen with the following constructs: A if B else C

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Fredrik Lundh wrote: > Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: > >> after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python >> there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: >> >> X if C else Y >> >> which is the same as today's >> >> (Y, X)[bool(C)] > > hopefully, only

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Richie Hindle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes. From Guido's announcement at > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056846.html: > > The syntax will be > > A if C else B Wow, I thought this was a prank at first. Congratulations to Guido. I think the introduction of lis

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

[Fredrik] > > X if C else Y > > hopefully, only one of Y or X is actually evaluated ? Yes. From Guido's announcement at http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-September/056846.html: > The syntax will be > > A if C else B > > This first evaluates C; if it is true, A is evaluated

Re: [Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Reinhold Birkenfeld wrote: > after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python > there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: > > X if C else Y > > which is the same as today's > > (Y, X)[bool(C)] hopefully, only one of Y or X is actually evaluated

[Info] PEP 308 accepted - new conditional expressions

Hi, after Guido's pronouncement yesterday, in one of the next versions of Python there will be a conditional expression with the following syntax: X if C else Y which is the same as today's (Y, X)[bool(C)] or C and X or Y (only if X is True) Reinhold -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listin