[Steven Bethard] > +0. I'm not thoroughly convinced that generators are that much easier > to read than a class. But I don't find them hard to read, and I think > it would only take a little effort to learn that generators might not > always be intended to build iterators.
I am proposing (like Phillip Eby in his response to PEP 340) to use a special decorator that turns a generator into a "do-template", so the intention is evident from the generator declaration. > If we do support generators in do-statements, I'd like their > __enter__() and __exit__() methods (if possible) to have semantics > like Nick Coghlan suggested[1], so that: > * __enter__() raises an exception if next() has already been called, and > * __exit__() raises an exception if StopIteration is not raised I guess you missed my post where I gave the code for the decorator; it does exactly that. > The simpler semantics give you the difference between a normal exit > and an exceptional exit. I'd like to see an example that needs to > know the difference between block completion exit and a > break/continue/return exit before I'd want to make PEP 340 redux this > much more complex. I agreed to that in my response to Phillip Eby. I do want to pass the exception into __exit__ so that it can be logged, for example. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
