We have assumed control, we have assumed control, we have assumed

control.

Clean this PEP up to reflect current reality, and mark it Final.

pep-0202.txt

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 PEP: 202
 Title: List Comprehensions
 Version: $Revision$
-Author: tim@digicool.com (Tim Peters)
-Status: Draft
+Author: barry@zope.com (Barry Warsaw)
+Status: Final
 Type: Standards Track
 Python-Version: 2.0
 Created: 13-Jul-2000
@@ -51,86 +51,33 @@ Examples
      (4, 'Peaches'), (4, 'Pears')]
     >>> print [(i,f) for i in nums for f in fruit if f[0] == "P" if i%2 == 1]
     [(1, 'Peaches'), (1, 'Pears'), (3, 'Peaches'), (3, 'Pears')]
-    >>> def zip(*args):
-    ...    return apply(map, (None,)+args)
-    ... 
     >>> print [i for i in zip(nums,fruit) if i[0]%2==0]
     [(2, 'Peaches'), (4, 'Bananas')]
 
 
 Reference Implementation
 
-    SourceForge contains a patch that adds list comprehensions to Python[1].
+    List comprehensions become part of the Python language with
+    release 2.0, documented in [1].
 
 
 BDFL Pronouncements
 
-    Note: the BDFL refers to Guido van Rossum, Python's Benevolent
-    Dictator For Life.
-
     - The syntax proposed above is the Right One.
 
-    - The form [x, y for ...] should be disallowed; one should be
-      required to write [(x, y) for ...].
+    - The form [x, y for ...] is disallowed; one is required to write
+      [(x, y) for ...].
 
     - The form [... for x... for y...] nests, with the last index
       varying fastest, just like nested for loops.
 
 
-Open Issues
-
-    Syntax
-
-        Several people proposed connecting or separating syntax
-        between the various clauses, for example, requiring a
-        semicolon between them to set them apart:
-
-            [i,f; for i in nums; for f in fruit; if f[0]=="P"; if i%2==1]
-
-        To minimize strain on the Python parser, Guido has suggested
-        requiring parentheses around the initial tuple:
-
-            [(i,f) for i in nums for f in fruit if f[0]=="P" if i%2==1]
-
-    Semantics
-
-        The semantics of multiple for clauses is not obvious to many
-        people.  Currently, it nests, so that
-
-            [i,f for i in nums for f in fruit]
-
-        is functionally equivalent to
-
-            tmp = []
-            for i in nums:
-                for f in fruit:
-                    tmp.append((i,f))
-
-        Other people would read it as if it executed
-
-            map(None, nums, fruit)
-
-        It's not clear that this is necessary.  The newly proposed
-        zip() builtin[2] takes care of that case.
-
-    Stability of the Implementation
-
-        The current reference implementation is simply an adaptation
-        of Greg Ewing's original demonstration of the concept.  Other
-        than tracking changes to the source code to keep it a valid
-        patch, reindenting the code and switching to function
-        prototypes, nothing has been done to it.  This obviously
-        raises some questions about how stable the code is.  It has
-        not had a lot of exercise, though the patch does include a few
-        test cases.
-
-
 References
 
-    [1] https://sourceforge.net/patch/?func=detailpatch&patch_id=100654&group_id=5470
-    [2] Lockstep Iteration, pep-0201.txt
+    [1] http://www.python.org/doc/current/ref/lists.html#l2h-238
 
 
+
 Local Variables:
 mode: indented-text
 indent-tabs-mode: nil