replacing `else` with `then` in `for` and `try`

[bartc]

On 03/11/2017 11:49, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2017-11-03, Steve D'Aprano <steve+python at pearwood.info> wrote:

>> Right, which is what happens with the for...else block.
> 
> No. Ok, so look. It's obvious that you and I have different mental
> models of the situation here. You're thinking of 'for...else' as two
> arbitrary clauses that run consecutively unless the whole thing is
> aborted by a 'break', whereas I'm thinking of the 'for' clause as
> being a search for a situation that matches a condition and the
> 'else' clause being what happens if the condition is not matched
> (i.e. exactly the same as 'if...else').
> 
> Now there's nothing inherently *wrong* with your choice of mental
> model, except it's leading you into confusion because my model means
> the meaning of the 'else' keyword is intuitive and obvious, and yours
> means it's counter-intuitive and confusing. Your suggestion is that
> the fix is to change the language, my suggestion is to fix your model.
> I'd suggest that changing your mind is easier than changing the
> language ;-)

I don't think there will be a short keyword that will suit everyone. It 
may be necessary to use this to spell out exactly how it works:

   for i in r:
      pass ...
   after_normal_loop_termination_then:
      pass ...

(And now, there is the possibility of having an additional 'else' clause 
to cover abnormal termination via break. This time what 'else' does is 
more obvious.)

-- 
bartc