On 10/7/05, Piet Delport <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Earlier this week, i proposed legalizing "return Result" inside a generator, > and making it act like "raise StopIteration( Result )", for exactly this > reason. > > IMHO, this is an elegant and straightforward extension of the current > semantics of returns inside generators, and is the final step toward making > generator-based concurrent tasks[1] look just like the equivalent synchronous > code (with the only difference, more-or-less, being the need for appropriate > "yield" keywords, and a task runner/scheduler loop). > > This change would make a huge difference to the practical usability of these > generator-based tasks. I think they're much less likely to catch on if you > have to write "raise StopIteration( Result )" (or "_return( Result )") all the > time. > > [1] a.k.a. coroutines, which i don't think is an accurate name, anymore.
Before we do this I'd like to see you show some programming examples that show how this would be used. I'm having a hard time understanding where you would need this but I realize I haven't used this paradigm enough to have a good feel for it, so I'm open for examples. At least this makes more sense than mapping "return X" into "yield X; return" as someone previously proposed. :) -- --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
