> > The one persistent (but low-as-a-whisper) grumbling is by one > > A.M., who keeps mumbling "they're _iterator_ expressions, the fact > > that they use generators is an implementation detail, grmbl > > grmbl":-). > > I'm inclined to agree with him. Was there some reason why the term > iterator expressions was rejected? After seeing "iterator expressions" I came up wit "generator expressions" and decided I liked that better. Around the same time Tim Peters wrote a post where he proposed "generator expressions" independently: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039186.html Trying to rationalize my own gut preference, I think I like "generator expressions" better than "iterator expressions" because there are so many other expressions that yield iterators (e.g. iter(x) comes to mind :-). Just like generator functions are one specific cool way of creating an iterator, generator expressions are another specific cool way, and as a bonus, they're related in terms of implementation (and that certainly reflects on corners of the semantics, so I don't think we should try to hide this as an implementation detail). --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4