Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The discussion about PEP 343 reminds me of the following. Bram Cohen
> pointed out in private email that, before PEP 342, there wasn't a big
> need for a shortcut to pass control to a "sub-generator" because the
> following for-loop works well enough:
>
> def main_generator():
> ...
> for value in sub_generator():
> yield value
For small values of `well enough`. I sometimes override a generator in
a subclass and it sucks to add the loop just because the derived
generator wants to add a value at the beginning or end.
> but now that yield can return a value, that value might have to be
> passed into sub_generator(), not to mention of exceptions. I'm sure
> there's a way to write that (although I haven't found the time to
> figure it out) but I expect it to be cumbersome and subtle. I don't
> think a helper function can be created to solve this problem, because
> the yield syntax is essential.
>
> Bram suggested the following syntax:
>
> def main_generator():
> ...
> yieldthrough sub_generator()
>
> I'm not keen on that particular keyword, but I do believe a syntactic
> solution is needed, if the problem is important enough to be solved.
How about:
def main_generator():
...
yield * sub_generator()
Ducking-ly yrs,
--
Christian Tanzer http://www.c-tanzer.at/
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
