Guido van Rossum wrote:
> [Brett]
>
>>I think I agree with Samuele that it would be more pertinent to put all of this
>>effort into trying to come up with some way to handle cleanup in a generator.
>
>
> I.e. PEP 325.
>
> But (as I explained, and you agree) that still doesn't render PEP 310
> unnecessary, because abusing the for-loop for implied cleanup
> semantics is ugly and expensive, and would change generator semantics;
> and it bugs me that the finally clause's reachability depends on the
> destructor executing.
>
yes, PEP325 would work in combination with PEP310, whether a combined
thing (which cannot be the current for as dicussed) is desirable is a
different issue: these anyway
f = file(...):
for line in f:
...
vs.
it = gen():
for val in it:
...
would be analogous in a PEP310+325 world.
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