RetroSearch Browse

Fri Feb 6 06:32:03 CET 2009 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-February/085906.html

Why is "call expr" a more enticing syntax than "yield *expr" ?

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:31 PM, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>> What's so special about your proposal that requires a new keyword?
>
> I was thinking about the proposals that are made
> from time to time for things like
>
>  yield *foo
>
> to yield all the items from a sub-generator. I was
> also thinking about what could be done to make
> using generators as coroutines more convenient,
> and I came up with the idea of a new statement
>
>  call expr
>
> which would be equivalent to
>
>  for x in expr:
>    yield x
>
> This happens to be the same as what "yield *"
> would do, so it kind of unifies the two issues.
>
> --
> Greg
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
>

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-February/085906.html below:

[Python-Dev] Missing operator.call