Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 342 suggestion: start(), __call__() and unwind_call() methods

2005-10-08 Thread Piet Delport
Nick Coghlan wrote: Phillip J. Eby wrote: Nick Coghlan wrote: [...] Last, but far from least, as far as I can tell you can implement all of these semantics using PEP 342 as it sits. That is, it's very simple to make decorators or classes that add those semantics. I don't see

[Python-Dev] Proposal for 2.5: Returning values from PEP 342 enhanced generators

2005-10-03 Thread Piet Delport
PEP 255 (Simple Generators) closes with: Q. Then why not allow an expression on return too? A. Perhaps we will someday. In Icon, return expr means both I'm done, and but I have one final useful value to return too, and this is it. At the start, and in the absence of compelling uses

[Python-Dev] Proposal for 2.5: Returning values from PEP 342 enhanced generators

2005-10-03 Thread Piet Delport
PEP 255 (Simple Generators) closes with: Q. Then why not allow an expression on return too? A. Perhaps we will someday. In Icon, return expr means both I'm done, and but I have one final useful value to return too, and this is it. At the start, and in the absence of compelling uses