On 10/20/05, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 04:04 PM 10/20/2005 -0400, Jeremy Hylton wrote: > >On 10/20/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Whoa, folks! Can I ask the gentlemen to curb their enthusiasm? > > > > > > PEP 343 is still (back) on the drawing table, PEP 342 has barely been > > > implemented (did it survive the AST-branch merge?), and already you > > > are talking about adding more stuff. Please put on the brakes! > > > >Yes. PEP 342 survived the merge of the AST branch. I wonder, though, > >if the Grammar for it can be simplified at all. I haven't read the > >PEP closely, but I found the changes a little hard to follow. That > >is, why was the grammar changed the way it was -- or how would you > >describe the intent of the changes? > > The intent was to make it so that '(yield optional_expr)' always works, and > also that [lvalue =] yield optional_expr works. If you can find another > way to hack the grammar so that both of 'em work, it's certainly okay by > me. The changes I made were just the simplest things I could figure out to > do.
Right. > I seem to recall that the hard part was the need for 'yield expr,expr' to > be interpreted as '(yield expr,expr)', not '(yield expr),expr', for > backward compatibility reasons. But only at the statement level. These should be errors IMO: foo(yield expr, expr) foo(expr, yield expr) foo(1 + yield expr) x = yield expr, expr x = expr, yield expr x = 1 + yield expr -- --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
