Thank you all for some precisions about yield and generators. But I would like to underline that I am *not* a complete newbie, and I understand this stuff in general. I read the yield.html material quite a time ago. But thank you for the PEP, I should have scanned it more carefully.
My problem was the *context of suspension*. You see, when some text speaks about the preservation of local state, etc., *a priori* the following sequence def gen() a b c yield x d e f yield y *COULD BE* understood as follows. Upon the call s=gen(), a, b and c *get* executed, change the global state, install some local, and then the system makes the snapshot, and returns the generator with its context. The call to next returns x to the caller, but the generator works for some time, and executes d, e and f before the next suspension. Now I know that this is not true. The CO- flag of the gen() procedure inhibits the execution of the code altogether, and a, b, c are executed upon the first s.next; d, e and f - upon the second next. Etc. OK, that's it, I accept such behaviour, although the alternative could be interesting as well. ==== Steve Holden wrote: > The first hing you need to realise is that s is a generator, and it > needs to be used in an iterative context to see the (sequence of) > yielded results: This is not exact, this is a *particular* consumer view of generators. I don't want them for iterators, I use them as emulators of *lazy programming*, I implement some co-recursive algorithms with them. So i use next() when I wish, and never 'for'. Thank you once more. Jerzy Karczmarczuk -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list