Raymond Hettinger added the comment:
It's mostly pedagogical - similar to normal functions
vs generator functions,
I see a need for this but object to calling it a generator rather than a
function that makes a generator or generator creating function or somesuch.
There is a huge semantic
Nick Coghlan added the comment:
I don't think we should rush this one, especially as PEP 484 provides the
possibility for tools (including educational tools) to infer the appropriate
return types for generator and coroutine functions.
Bumping the target version to 3.6 accordingly.
--
Yury Selivanov added the comment:
Nick, Berker, a kind reminder -- please review the patch if we want to have it
in 3.5.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
___
Berker Peksag added the comment:
I'm not the ideal candidate to review the second patch since I'm not familiar
with the best practices of C :)
--
nosy: +serhiy.storchaka
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:
I like the look of the repr Terry proposes better. For generator objects the
repr is either coroutine object %S at %p or generator object %S at %p.
coroutine function %S at %p and generator function %S at %p would be
consistent with this. It also shows the
Changes by Yury Selivanov yseliva...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39461/issue24056_2.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
___
Changes by Yury Selivanov yseliva...@gmail.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file39460/issue24056_2.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
___
Yury Selivanov added the comment:
Nick, Berker, please find an updated patch attached (with support for
coroutines). Big +1 on the idea, BTW.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39460/issue24056_2.diff
___
Python tracker
Changes by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis arfrever@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +Arfrever
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
___
Nick Coghlan added the comment:
The main reason I suggest using the postfix parenthetical syntax is to make
it clear that we're exposing behavioural feature flags for a single
underlying type. A prefix syntax would make them look like distinct types,
which would be misleading in a different way.
R. David Murray added the comment:
Although I like the look of the repr Terry proposes better, I agree with Nick:
it would imply that the types were distinct, which they are not.
--
nosy: +r.david.murray
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Terry J. Reedy added the comment:
Describing generator functions as such is a great idea. But how about
generator function f at 0x7f7dad9f7bf8
Marking closure functions as such is a bit more subtle. However, there ia a
real point that closure functions have a hidden input. If it is
Nick Coghlan added the comment:
It's mostly pedagogical - similar to normal functions vs generator
functions, folks talk about functions and closures as different things, even
though in Python a closure is just a normal function with one or more
references to cells that were defined in outer
Mark Dickinson added the comment:
I can see that the `generator` information would be useful. What's the
use-case for reporting that a function is a closure? I'm having trouble
thinking of a case where it's useful to know that a function is a closure
without also knowing which locals refer
Berker Peksag added the comment:
Here is a patch with a test.
--
components: +Interpreter Core
keywords: +patch
nosy: +berker.peksag
stage: needs patch - patch review
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39224/issue24056.diff
___
Python tracker
Changes by Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com:
--
stage: - needs patch
type: - enhancement
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
___
New submission from Nick Coghlan:
From https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2015-April/033177.html,
there are some additional details about functions that could be usefully
exposed in the function repr, specifically whether or not it's a closure, and
whether or not it's a generator
Changes by Yury Selivanov yseliva...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +yselivanov
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Changes by Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us:
--
nosy: +ethan.furman
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Changes by Petr Viktorin encu...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +encukou
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24056
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing
20 matches
Mail list logo
