I have a longer comment here that argues the opposite: list-comprehensions are only a syntactic pun or two away from set-builder notation, which is a higher level-of-abstraction (it declaratively states what it is) than map+filter (which specify a procedure to generate it, albeit at higher level of abstraction than a for-loop).
If you can put together a nontrivial usage of map+filter with at least three source collections that's more concise than the equivalent list comprehension I'll (figuratively) eat my hat.
If you can put together a nontrivial usage of map+filter with at least three source collections that's more concise than the equivalent list comprehension I'll (figuratively) eat my hat.