On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:
> So is the explicit functional style, with arrows for sugar, really too much?

It was too much for Haskellers, who have a similarly light (or even
lighter) lambda syntax. ^_^  That rightward march and the leftward
paren tail is a bit frustrating.

But given the primacy of iterables in programming, and the existing
Python legacy, I'm all for keeping the comprehension syntax focused on
iterables.  We can always add do-expressions later, after all, and
maybe even sugar the lifting operation as cleanly as Haskell does.

~TJ

On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:
> So is the explicit functional style, with arrows for sugar, really too much?

It was too much for Haskellers, who have a similarly light (or even
lighter) lambda syntax. ^_^  That rightward march and the leftward
paren tail is a bit frustrating.

But given the primacy of iterables in programming, and the existing
Python legacy, I'm all for keeping the comprehension syntax focused on
iterables.  We can always add do-expressions later, after all, and
maybe even sugar the lifting operation as cleanly as Haskell does.