Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com writes:
I think the whole concept of inspecting for this is broken. *Any*
function can return a generator-iterator. A generator function is just a
function that happens to always return one.
In other words, the confusion is in the idea of
Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu writes:
tout court?? is not English or commonly used at least in America
It is French:
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561508877/tout_court.html
I thought it was common in English too, but clearly I was mistaken.
Ok, you mean generator function, which
Neal Norwitz nnorwitz at gmail.com writes:
I wonder whether a check shouldn't just return (co_flags 0x20), which
is CO_GENERATOR.
Makes more sense.
Okay, but my point is that the final user should not be expected to know
about those implementation details. The one obvious way to me is
Michele Simionato wrote:
Neal Norwitz nnorwitz at gmail.com writes:
I wonder whether a check shouldn't just return (co_flags 0x20), which
is CO_GENERATOR.
Makes more sense.
Okay, but my point is that the final user should not be expected to know
about those implementation details.
Michele Simionato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Neal Norwitz nnorwitz at gmail.com writes:
I wonder whether a check shouldn't just return (co_flags 0x20),
which
is CO_GENERATOR.
Makes more sense.
Okay, but my point is that the final user should not be
Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu writes:
To me, another obvious way is isinstance(object, gentype) where
gentype = type(i for i in []) # for instance
which should also be in types module.
No, that check would match generator objects, not generators tout court.
On a related notes,
Georg Brandl g.brandl at gmx.net writes:
I'd say, go ahead and write a patch including docs, and I think there's no
problem with accepting it (as long as it comes before beta1).
I was having a look at http://docs.python.org/dev/lib/inspect-types.html
and it would seem that adding isgenerator
Michele Simionato wrote:
Georg Brandl g.brandl at gmx.net writes:
I'd say, go ahead and write a patch including docs, and I think there's no
problem with accepting it (as long as it comes before beta1).
I was having a look at http://docs.python.org/dev/lib/inspect-types.html
and it would
Michele Simionato wrote:
Georg Brandl g.brandl at gmx.net writes:
Also, should one add
a GeneratorType, perhaps as a subclass of FunctionType?
Add GeneratorType where? There is already one in the types module.
Yep, this is the crux. types.GeneratorType refers to generator objects,
Michele Simionato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, that check would match generator objects, not generators tout court.
tout court?? is not English or commonly used at least in America
On a related notes, inspect.isfunction gives True on a generator, such
as
Michele Simionato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yep, this is the crux. types.GeneratorType refers to generator objects,
which in an improper sense are instances of a generator function.
I.e.
def g(): yield 1 # this is a generator
go = g() # this is a generator
At 09:26 AM 6/1/2006 +, Michele Simionato wrote:
Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu writes:
To me, another obvious way is isinstance(object, gentype) where
gentype = type(i for i in []) # for instance
which should also be in types module.
No, that check would match generator objects, not
Phillip J. Eby writes:
Yes, I think the whole concept of inspecting for this is broken.
*Any* function can return a generator-iterator. A generator
function is just a function that happens to always return one.
Just following up on Phillip's comments, consider the following functions:
Michele Simionato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there still time for new feature requests in Python 2.5?
I am missing a isgenerator function in the inspect module. Right now
I am using
def isgenerator(func):
return func.func_code.co_flags == 99
but it is
Terry Reedy wrote:
def isgenerator(func):
return func.func_code.co_flags == 99
but it is rather ugly (horrible indeed).
To me, part of the beauty of Python is that is so easy to write such things
so compactly, so that we do not need megaAPIs with hundreds of functions
and methods.
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
def isgenerator(func):
return func.func_code.co_flags == 99
but it is rather ugly (horrible indeed).
To me, part of the beauty of Python is that is so easy to write such things
so compactly, so that we do not need megaAPIs with hundreds of
On 5/29/06, Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
is there some natural and obvious connection between generators and that
number that I'm missing, or is that constant perhaps best hidden inside
some introspection support module?
It seems to be a combination of
17 matches
Mail list logo
