> The proper way to parse or construct nested list comprehensions as explained in pep 202 is to think like you're using normal for:
A syntax construct that requires you to think in a different syntax construct to understand it is not a good syntax construct.
> Everything stays the same except the "use" part that goes in the front (the rule also includes the filters - if).
Yeah, you consistently have to write the end first followed by the start and then the middle, it's just in most cases there's no middle so you naturally think you only have to flip the syntax rather than having to write it middle-ended like a US date.
for a in b:
This would be[use(a,b,c) for a in b for c in a]
Everything stays the same except the "use" part that goes in the front (the rule also includes the filters - if).