Well, the fact that different people's brains work differently is hardly worth remarking in this day and age. Hence my (and other people's) questioning of the word "needed" in the title of this thread.David Eppstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Douglas Alan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Cetainly, if <yield_all iterator> == <for i in iterator: yield i>, I don't see how anything is gained except for a few keystrokes.
What's gained is making one's code more readable and maintainable, which is the one of the primary reasons that I use Python.
I don't see a lot of difference in readability and maintainability between the two versions.
In that case, your brain works nothing like mine.
Guido has generally observed a parsimony about the introduction of features such as the one you suggest into Python, and in particular he is reluctant to add new keywords - even in cases like decorators that cried out for a keyword rather than the ugly "@" syntax.
In my opinion that is a good thing mostly, not only because it avoids code breakage (which can't possibly be bad) but also because it tends to limit the number of ways that different programmers can express the same idea.
I suspect this is why people have suggested that you were "only going to save a few keystrokes". Despite your feeling that yield_all makes the intent of the code more obvious there seems to be a majority in favor of the simpler expression of the idea with a yield in a loop.
If you think there's a genuine chance this could be usefully added to Python the solution is obvious: write and submit a PEP.
regards Steve -- Meet the Python developers and your c.l.py favorites March 23-25 Come to PyCon DC 2005 http://www.pycon.org/ Steve Holden http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
