Python has a compact syntax for constructing a list with a loop and a condition, called a list comprehension:
my_list = [ f(x) for x in sequence if cond(x) ]
You can also build dictionaries with dictionary comprehensions, and sets with set comprehensions:
my_dict = { k(x): v(x) for x in sequence if cond(x) }
my_set = { f(x) for x in sequence if cond(x) }
(The syntax allows more complexity than these examples, let's not get distracted!)
Finally, you can make a generator with similar syntax:
my_generator = ( f(x) for x in sequence if cond(x) )
Unfortunately, this is called a generator expression, not a generator comprehension. Why not? If the first three are all comprehensions, why isn't this a comprehension?
PEP 289, Generator Expressions has detailed notes at the end which point out that Raymond Hettinger originally proposed "generator comprehensions," that they were then resurrected by Peter Norvig as "accumulation displays," and that Tim Peters suggested the name "generator expressions." It does not explain why the names changed along the way.
I made a query on Twitter:
OK, #python question I don’t know the answer to: why are they called “generator expressions” and not “generator comprehensions”?
Guido's reply gets at the heart of the matter:
Originally comprehension was part of the "literal display" notion. GenExprs are not displays.
Matt Boehm found the email where Tim Peters proposed "generator expression" that also has some details.
After reading that, I understand more. First, what's with the word "comprehension"? As Tim pointed out, the word comes from set theory's Axiom of Comprehension, which talks about sets formed by applying a predicate (condition) to elements of another set. This is very similar to lists formed by applying a condition to elements of another sequence.
As Guido's tweet points out, and the subject line of the email thread makes clear ("accumulator display syntax"), the designers at the time were thinking much more about displays than they were about conditions. The word "display" here means that the syntax for the code looks like the data structure it will create. A list display (list comprehension) looks like a list. Same for set and dictionary displays. But there is no generator literal syntax, so there's nothing for a generator display to look like, so there are no generator displays.
In that original email thread designing the feature, the word "comprehension" became synonymous with "display", and since generators couldn't have displays, they also couldn't have comprehensions.
But as Tim points out in his email, the interesting part of a comprehension is the condition. The heart of the Axiom of Comprehension is the predicate. Perhaps because the condition is optional in a Python comprehension, the focus shifted to the display aspect.
I think we should call them "generator comprehensions" again. We don't use the term "display" for these things. There's no reason to link "comprehension" to "display," and literal syntax.
The four different expressions (list comprehension, dict comprehension, set comprehension, and generator expressions) have an awful lot in common with each other. It would be a great shorthand to be able to discuss their similarities by talking about "comprehensions" and having it cover all four. Their similarities are more than their differences, so let's use the same word for all four.
Proposal: call them "generator comprehensions."