Describe the Bug

In Python, the following syntax is valid:

[(i, j) for i in range(3) if i > 0 for j in range(5) if j % 2 == 0]

However, in the current python.lark grammar, the relevant rule is defined as:

comprehension{comp_result}: comp_result comp_fors [comp_if]
comp_fors: comp_for+
comp_for: [ASYNC] "for" exprlist "in" or_test

With this grammar definition, the two if conditions cannot be parsed correctly. It only allows cases such as:

[(i, j) for i in range(3) for j in range(5) if j % 2 == 0 if j > 0]

In this structure, the if clauses are associated globally with the entire comprehension rather than individually with each for clause. This is incorrect because, in Python, each for clause in a comprehension can have its own set of if filters.

To Reproduce

I’m unable to provide a simple standalone reproduction script, but as described above, the provided example:

[(i, j) for i in range(3) if i > 0 for j in range(5) if j % 2 == 0]

fails to parse correctly under the current grammar. The issue is that the if clauses are incorrectly attached to the comprehension rule as a whole, rather than being associated with their respective comp_for. Each for loop in a comprehension should be able to have its own if filters.

Proposed Fix

In my project, the issue was resolved by modifying the grammar as follows:

comprehension{comp_result}: comp_result comp_fors
comp_fors: comp_for+
comp_for: [ASYNC] "for" exprlist "in" or_test comp_if*

This change allows each for clause to optionally have its own if filters, which aligns with Python’s actual comprehension syntax.