On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Mark Shannon <m...@hotpy.org> wrote: > It really ought say that "yield from" is equivalent to inlining > in the PEP.
That's what the motivation section is about. There's also an entire subsection called "The Refactoring Principle" that describes this intent. However, we needed something more concrete to flesh out the original implementation details, which is what the code equivalent was designed to provide (it was also designed to point out that the days of "you can just use a simple for loop" actually went away when PEP 342 was implemented). Now, it may be that we fixed things during implementation that should be reflected back into the formal semantic spec in the PEP - so if you can point out specific cases where what we implemented doesn't match the nominal behaviour, I'm open to updating the PEP accordingly. (Of course, if there are any tests that fail solely due to the two known differences in semantics that are already noted in the PEP, they don't count). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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
