Roundup Robot added the comment:
New changeset e02da391741f by Benjamin Peterson in branch '3.3':
eliminate redundancy between yield stmt and yield expr docs (closes #12704)
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/e02da391741f
New changeset c6b4a5354c23 by Benjamin Peterson in branch 'default':
merge
Benjamin Peterson added the comment:
Thank you. In the future, please remember to wrap paragraphs to 80 chars and
run make patchcheck to cleanup whitespace issues.
--
nosy: +benjamin.peterson
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Nikolaus Rath added the comment:
That makes sense. Attached is an updated patch. It removes most of the
duplication, and clearly says that there is no semantic difference between the
yield statement and the yield expression at all.
I also moved the see also block to follow the description of
Nikolaus Rath added the comment:
(adding the documentation experts from
http://docs.python.org/devguide/experts.html to noisy in the hope to push this
forward)
--
nosy: +eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl
___
Python tracker
Georg Brandl added the comment:
Hmm, the yield statement is now basically the same as any expression statement
-- just like a function call. The only reason it's a separate grammar symbol
is that otherwise yield expressions would have to be parenthesized.
Can the patch be updated to make
Changes by Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us:
--
nosy: +ethan.furman
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12704
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Nikolaus Rath added the comment:
*ping*
Any comments on the updated patch? Can it be applied?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12704
___
Nikolaus Rath added the comment:
I've attached an updated patch.
I agree with Tim that the docs on the yield expression are already very good,
so instead of extending the yield statement documentation I have shortened it
to instead reduce the overlap that already exists.
In the yield
Eli Bendersky added the comment:
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Nikolaus Rath rep...@bugs.python.orgwrote:
Nikolaus Rath added the comment:
On 09/04/2013 06:03 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
Why guess... did you try it in the code?
I don't follow... why guess what? And try what in code?
I
Changes by Berker Peksag berker.pek...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +pje
versions: -Python 2.6, Python 3.1, Python 3.2
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12704
___
Eli Bendersky added the comment:
Why guess... did you try it in the code?
Trying has another goal - it would be nice to have a short code sample here
demonstrating what's happening. The paragraph you're quoting seems obscure to
me, with or without the fix.
--
nosy: +eli.bendersky
Nikolaus Rath added the comment:
On 09/04/2013 06:03 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
Why guess... did you try it in the code?
I don't follow... why guess what? And try what in code?
it would be nice to have a short code sample here demonstrating what's
happening. The paragraph you're quoting
Tim Peters added the comment:
I think the docs are already clear: they say the generator-iterator’s close()
method will be called. That's all that needs to be said: now go look at the
docs for generator.close(). They explain _all_ that close() does, and it would
be a Bad Idea to duplicate
Nikolaus Rath added the comment:
*ping*
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue12704
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
14 matches
Mail list logo
