Andrew Koenig wrote: >> Sure, that would work. Or even this, if the scheduler would >> automatically recognize generator objects being yielded and so would run >> the the nested coroutine until finish: > > This idea has been discussed before. I think the problem with recognizing > generators as the subject of "yield" statements is that then you can't yield > a generator even if you want to. > > The best syntax I can think of without adding a new keyword looks like this: > > yield from x > > which would be equivalent to > > for i in x: > yield i > > Note that this equivalence would imply that x can be any iterable, not just > a generator. For example: > > yield from ['Hello', 'world'] > > would be equivalent to > > yield 'Hello' > yield 'world'
Hmm, I actually quite like that. The best I came up with was "yield for", and that just didn't read correctly. Whereas "yield from seq" says exactly what it is doing. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://boredomandlaziness.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ 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