[Phillip] > I could definitely go for dropping __next__ and the next() builtin from > PEP > 342, as they don't do anything extra. I also personally don't care about > the new continue feature, so I could do without for-loop alteration > too. I'd be perfectly happy passing arguments to next() explicitly; I > just > want yield expressions.
That's progress! Please do what you can to get the non-essential changes out of 342. > >Meanwhile, it hasn't promised any advantages over the dead PEP 288 > >proposals. > > Reading the comments in PEP 288's revision history, it sounds like the > argument was to postpone implementation of next(arg) and yield expressions > to a later version of Python, after more community experience with > generators. We've had that experience now. 288 was brought out of retirement a few months ago. Guido hated every variation of argument passing and frequently quipped that data passing was trivially accomplished though mutable arguments to a generator, through class based iterators, or via a global variable. I believe all of those comments were made recently and they all apply equally to 342. Raymond _______________________________________________ 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
