[issue17433] stdlib generator-like iterators don't forward send/throw
Changes by Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu: -- stage: - committed/rejected status: open - closed superseder: - Implement generator interface in itertools.chain. ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17433 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue17433] stdlib generator-like iterators don't forward send/throw
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: This was proposed before (see issue16150) and was rejected after discussing on Python-ideas. -- nosy: +serhiy.storchaka ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17433 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue17433] stdlib generator-like iterators don't forward send/throw
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: -- nosy: +rhettinger type: - enhancement ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17433 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue17433] stdlib generator-like iterators don't forward send/throw
Thomas Wouters added the comment: After writing a simplistic implementation of this for itertools.islice, I'm not sure if this is actually useful. While it's nice for symmetry, I have a hard time imagining how to use it -- so I can't write tests for the new feature, and it may not be a useful thing to have. Also, there are some design decision to be made, like what to do with an islice that needs to skip items. (The prototype just sends them None instead, which may or may not be appropriate for the hypothetical eventual usecase.) Tulip certainly won't be needing this kind of thing, as it doesn't fit the way it uses generators at all. It may be useful for generaors that are used as pipelines, but without an actual code example it's hard to say. I'm attaching the preliminary send/throw methods for islice, but setting resolution to 'later' until someone comes up with a usecase. -- keywords: +patch priority: normal - low resolution: - later Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file29468/islice_send.diff ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17433 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue17433] stdlib generator-like iterators don't forward send/throw
New submission from Thomas Wouters: In response to a question asked at Brett Cannon's Python 3.3 talk at PyCon, it occurs to me the iterators in the itertools module should participate in generator sending, so that you can do this: def report_first_ten(g): s = itertools.islice(g, 10) yield from s print(First 10 done.) yield from g and then send (or throw) into the report_first_ten() generator, it fails (because itertools.islice() has no send method.) Similarly, perhaps itertools.izip() should gain a send method that sends into the iterators it's zipping, etc. -- components: Library (Lib) messages: 184273 nosy: twouters priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: stdlib generator-like iterators don't forward send/throw versions: Python 3.4 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17433 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
