Status of PEP's?

[David Eppstein]

In article <mailman.1014854027.3045.python-list at python.org>,
 James_Althoff at i2.com wrote:

> Below is a revision (not yet submitted) of PEP 276.

What was changed from the previous version?

> Rather than restart the entire debate on PEP 276, please send me
> suggestions for specific changes to the PEP.

Since this seems to be a matter of some confusion, I would like to see it 
much more clearly pointed out that this affects all contexts in which 
iterators are allowed (e.g. "in" operator) rather than just for-loops.

Although I fall into the camp you describe in the PEP of people who want a 
more substantive change to integer iteration, my main objection to this PEP 
does not seem to be addressed: that by blurring the boundary between 
integer and iterator types you add a nonobvious and confusing meaning to 
the expression "x in y" when y is an integer.

In the earlier discussion of this PEP, I made a different argument, that 
this PEP breaks the current property that "for something" always loops over 
exactly the values that make "something" true, but I now see that I was 
incorrect: it is still the case under the PEP that, e.g. "for x in 5" loops 
over exactly the values that make "x in 5" true.  My dislike now stems from 
the ugliness of the expression "x in 5".
-- 
David Eppstein       UC Irvine Dept. of Information & Computer Science
eppstein at ics.uci.edu http://www.ics.uci.edu/~eppstein/