I'll mark it as withdrawn.
Raymond
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Jeremy Hylton
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 8:44 AM
To: Guido van Rossum
Cc: Hans Polak; python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 315 - do while
On 10
On 10/4/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You are all wasting your time on this. It won't go in.
+1 from me. Should you mark PEP 315 as rejected?
Jeremy
>
> --
> --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
> ___
> Pyt
You are all wasting your time on this. It won't go in.
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python
k Coghlan
Cc: Hans Polak; python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 315 - do while
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> [snip..]
>
>> The current idiom works fine, but looks unnatural :
>>
>> while True:
>> if :
>>break
>
>
> There's the
From: Nick Coghlan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: martes, 03 de octubre de 2006 15:51
To: Fuzzyman
Cc: Hans Polak; python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 315 - do while
Fuzzyman wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> In my example, the 3 sections (, and > code> are all option
n-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 315 - do while
Nick Coghlan wrote:
>Hans Polak wrote:
>
>
>>Ok, I see your point. Really, I've read more about Python than worked with
>>it, so I'm out of my league here.
>>
>>Can I combine your suggestion with mi
al Message-
From: Nick Coghlan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: lunes, 02 de octubre de 2006 12:48
To: Hans Polak
Cc: python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 315 - do while
Hans Polak wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> Yep, PEP 315. Sorry about that.
>
> Now, about y
Hi Nick,
Yep, PEP 315. Sorry about that.
Now, about your suggestion
do:
while
else:
This is pythonic, but not logical. The 'do' will execute at least once, so
the else clause is not needed, nor is the . The should go before the while terminat
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Fuzzyman wrote:
>> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>> In my example, the 3 sections (, and >> completion
>>> code> are all optional. A basic do-while loop would look like this:
>>>
>>> do:
>>>
>>> while
>>>
>>> (That is, is still repeated each time around t
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> [snip..]
>
>> The current idiom works fine, but looks unnatural :
>>
>> while True:
>> if :
>>break
>
>
> There's the rationale for the PEP in a whole 5 lines counting
> whitespace ;)
>
>> Would a 'while' outside of a 'do' block (but without the colon) then be
>>
Fuzzyman wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> In my example, the 3 sections (, and > completion
>> code> are all optional. A basic do-while loop would look like this:
>>
>> do:
>>
>> while
>>
>> (That is, is still repeated each time around the loop - it's
>> called that b
Nick Coghlan wrote:
>Hans Polak wrote:
>
>
>>Ok, I see your point. Really, I've read more about Python than worked with
>>it, so I'm out of my league here.
>>
>>Can I combine your suggestion with mine and come up with the following:
>>
>> do:
>>
>>
>> while
>>
Hans Polak wrote:
> Ok, I see your point. Really, I've read more about Python than worked with
> it, so I'm out of my league here.
>
> Can I combine your suggestion with mine and come up with the following:
>
> do:
>
>
> while
> else:
>
In
Hans Polak wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> Yep, PEP 315. Sorry about that.
>
> Now, about your suggestion
> do:
>
> while
>
> else:
>
>
> This is pythonic, but not logical. The 'do' will execute at least once, so
> the else clause is not needed, nor is th
14 matches
Mail list logo
