a few more wording tweaks

Author: adqm

peps/pep-0798.rst

@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ Type: Standards Track
 Created: 19-Jul-2025
 Python-Version: 3.15
 Post-History: `16-Oct-2021 <https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/thread/7G732VMDWCRMWM4PKRG6ZMUKH7SUC7SH/>`__, `22-Jun-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/pre-pep-unpacking-in-comprehensions/96362>`__, `19-Jul-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-798-unpacking-in-comprehensions/99435>`__
+Resolution: `03-Nov-2025 <https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-798-unpacking-in-comprehensions/99435/60>`__
 
 
 Abstract
@@ -772,10 +773,8 @@ Beyond the proposal outlined above, the following were also considered:
 
    This strategy would also make unpacking in synchronous and asynchronous
    generators behave symmetrically, but it would also be more complex, enough
-   so that the cost may not be worth the benefit.  As such, this PEP proposes
-   that asynchronous generator expressions using the unpacking operator should
-   not adopt semantics similar to ``yield from`` until ``yield from`` is
-   supported in asynchronous generators more generally.
+   so that the cost may not be worth the benefit, particularly in the absense
+   of a compelling use case for delegation.
 
 3. Using ``yield from`` for unpacking in synchronous generator expressions, and
    disallowing unpacking in asynchronous generator expressions until they
@@ -790,20 +789,20 @@ Beyond the proposal outlined above, the following were also considered:
 4. Disallowing unpacking in all generator expressions.
 
    This would retain symmetry between the two cases, but with the downside of
-   losing a very expressive form.
-
+   losing an expressive form and symmetry between list/set comprehensions and
+   generator expressions.
 
 Each of these options (including the one presented in this PEP) has its
 benefits and drawbacks, with no option being clearly superior on all fronts.
 The semantics proposed in :ref:`pep798-genexpsemantics` above represent a
 reasonable compromise by allowing exactly the same kind of unpacking in
 synchronous and asynchronous generator expressions and retaining an existing
-property of generator expressions (that they do not
+property of generator expressions (that they do not delegate to subgenerators).
 
 This decision should be revisited in the event that asynchronous generators
 receive support for ``yield from`` in the future, in which case adjusting the
-semantics of unpacking in async generator expressions to use ``yield from``
-should be considered.
+semantics of unpacking in generator expressions to use ``yield from`` should be
+considered.
 
 
 Concerns and Disadvantages