[Python-ideas] Simpler syntax for basic iterations

[Luciano Ramalho]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:43 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> Well, that's even more limited.

Yep. That's the whole point.

>
>
> On Sunday, October 11, 2015, Luciano Ramalho <luciano at ramalho.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 11:12 PM, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>
>> wrote:
>> > Heh. "The whole point (15 years ago) of range() was to *avoid* needing
>> > syntax to specify a loop over numbers." I guess I'm nothing if not
>> > consistent. :-)
>>
>> Andre and I are not arguing for a special syntax to loop over numbers.
>> We are arguing for special syntax to repeat a block a number of times.
>> No indexing at all, and no variables need to be involved.
>>
>> for 3:
>>      fd(100)
>>      lt(120)
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Luciano
>>
>> --
>> Luciano Ramalho
>> |  Author of Fluent Python (O'Reilly, 2015)
>> |     http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920032519.do
>> |  Professor em: http://python.pro.br
>> |  Twitter: @ramalhoorg
>
>
>
> --
> --Guido (mobile)



-- 
Luciano Ramalho
|  Author of Fluent Python (O'Reilly, 2015)
|     http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920032519.do
|  Professor em: http://python.pro.br
|  Twitter: @ramalhoorg