PEP 798: Fixes and Clarifications from Discourse Thread

peps/pep-0798.rst

@@ -217,10 +217,10 @@ generator::
         for x in it:
             yield from expr
 
-Since ``yield from`` is not allowed inside of async generators, the equivalent
-for ``(*expr async for x in ait())``, is more like the following (though of
-course this new form should not define or reference the looping variable
-``i``)::
+Since ``yield from`` is not allowed inside of async generators (see the section
+of :pep:`525` on Asynchronous ``yield from``), the equivalent for ``(*expr
+async for x in ait())`` is more like the following (though of course this new
+form should not define or reference the looping variable ``i``)::
 
     async def generator():
         async for x in ait():
@@ -557,7 +557,8 @@ by a similar analogy::
     for x in it:
         out[k_expr] = v_expr
 
-    # equivalent to out = {**expr for x in it}
+    # equivalent to out = {**expr for x in it}, provided that expr evaluates to
+    # a mapping that can be unpacked with **
     out = {}
     for x in it:
         out.update(expr)
@@ -577,15 +578,15 @@ expressions that involve unpacking::
             yield from expr
     g = generator()
 
-We can then generalize from these specific examples to the idea that,
-wherever a non-starred comprehension/genexp would use an operator that
-adds a single element to a collection, the starred would instead use
-an operator that adds multiple elements to that collection.
+We can then generalize from these specific examples to the idea that, wherever
+a non-starred comprehension/genexp would use an operator that adds a single
+element to a collection, the starred would instead use an operator that adds
+multiple elements to that collection.
 
 Alternatively, we don't need to think of the two ideas as separate; instead,
 with the new syntax, we can think of ``out = [...x... for x in it]`` as
-equivalent to the following code [#pep798-guido]_, regardless of whether or not
-``...x...`` uses ``*``::
+equivalent to the following [#pep798-guido]_ (where ``...x...`` is a stand-in
+for arbitrary code), regardless of whether or not ``...x...`` uses ``*``::
 
     out = []
     for x in it:
@@ -595,7 +596,7 @@ Similarly, we can think of ``out = {...x... for x in it}`` as equivalent to the
 following code, regardless of whether or not ``...x...`` uses ``*`` or ``**``
 or ``:``::
 
-    out = set()
+    out = set()  # or out = {}
     for x in it:
         out.update({...x...})
 
@@ -744,45 +745,65 @@ to what is already available in Python, but support for using unpacking syntax
 within comprehensions is rare.  This section provides a brief summary of
 support for similar syntax in a few other languages.
 
-Many languages that support comprehensions support double loops::
+Many languages that support comprehensions support double loops:
+
+.. code:: python
 
     # python
     [x for xs in [[1,2,3], [], [4,5]] for x in xs * 2]
 
+.. code:: haskell
+
     -- haskell
     [x | xs <- [[1,2,3], [], [4,5]], x <- xs ++ xs]
 
+.. code:: julia
+
     # julia
     [x for xs in [[1,2,3], [], [4,5]] for x in [xs; xs]]
 
+.. code:: clojure
+
     ; clojure
     (for [xs [[1 2 3] [] [4 5]] x (concat xs xs)] x)
 
 Several other languages (even those without comprehensions) support these
 operations via a built-in function/method to support flattening of nested
-structures::
+structures:
+
+.. code:: python
 
     # python
     list(itertools.chain(*(xs*2 for xs in [[1,2,3], [], [4,5]])))
 
+.. code:: javascript
+
     // Javascript
     [[1,2,3], [], [4,5]].flatMap(xs => [...xs, ...xs])
 
+.. code:: haskell
+
     -- haskell
     concat (map (\x -> x ++ x) [[1,2,3], [], [4,5]])
 
+.. code:: ruby
+
     # ruby
     [[1, 2, 3], [], [4, 5]].flat_map {|e| e * 2}
 
 However, languages that support both comprehension and unpacking do not tend to
 allow unpacking within a comprehension.  For example, the following expression
-in Julia currently leads to a syntax error::
+in Julia currently leads to a syntax error:
+
+.. code:: julia
 
     [xs... for xs in [[1,2,3], [], [4,5]]]
 
 As one counterexample, support for a similar syntax was recently added to `Civet
 <https://civet.dev/>`_.  For example, the following is a valid comprehension in
-Civet, making use of Javascript's ``...`` syntax for unpacking::
+Civet, making use of Javascript's ``...`` syntax for unpacking:
+
+.. code:: javascript
 
     for xs of [[1,2,3], [], [4,5]] then ...(xs++xs)