On Apr 19, 6:10 am, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
> ...
> I only just started reading Beazley's presentation, it looks interesting.
> Thanks for the hint!
>
> Are you currently using coroutines in Python? If so, what kind of practical
> problems do they simplify for you?
I thought I'd chim
On Apr 17, 10:07 pm, Aaron Brady wrote:
> You can do it with a wrapping generator. I'm not sure if it
> interferes with your needs. It calls 'next' the first time, then just
> calls 'send' on the parameter with the value you send it.
Aaron,
Thanks for the hint. I'd made a modified version of m
In article ,
Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>
>Generators at the moment seem to have turned into what in German we call
>an "eierlegende Wollmilchsau"*.
One more point: there has always been a tension within the Python
community between people pushing the bleeding edge and people who prefe
In article ,
Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>Aahz wrote:
>> In article
>> <07ad771b-a6d1-4f08-b16c-07caf7462...@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
>> Michele Simionato wrote:
>>>On Apr 18, 3:03=A0pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote:
In article ,
Peter Otten =A0<__pete...@web.de> w
Aahz wrote:
> In article
> <07ad771b-a6d1-4f08-b16c-07caf7462...@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
> Michele Simionato wrote:
>>On Apr 18, 3:03=A0pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote:
>>> In article ,
>>> Peter Otten =A0<__pete...@web.de> wrote:
If it were up to me I'd rip out send() imme
On Apr 19, 8:09 am, Michele Simionato wrote:
> Coroutines instead could have been implemented as
> a library, without requiring any syntax change.
Here is a proof of principle, just to make clearer
what I have in mind. Suppose you have the following
library:
$ cat coroutine.py
from abc import abs
On Apr 18, 5:19 pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote:
> Okay, I'm curious, is the argument that you shouldn't use generators for
> coroutines or something else?
Yes, there is certainly the confusion between generators
and coroutines (the ones David Beazley warns about).
At first, I was a support
In article <07ad771b-a6d1-4f08-b16c-07caf7462...@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
Michele Simionato wrote:
>On Apr 18, 3:03=A0pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote:
>> In article ,
>> Peter Otten =A0<__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>If it were up to me I'd rip out send() immediatly. At first I thoug
On Apr 18, 3:03 pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote:
> In article ,
> Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>
>
>
> >If it were up to me I'd rip out send() immediatly. At first I thought I
> >would see a compelling use case and be enlightened, but it never happened.
>
> Too late -- it's likely t
In article ,
Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>
>If it were up to me I'd rip out send() immediatly. At first I thought I
>would see a compelling use case and be enlightened, but it never happened.
Too late -- it's likely to get an upgrade for 3.1 and 2.7. Basically,
send() is useful for cor
Dale Roberts wrote:
> I've started using generators for some "real" work (love them!), and I
> need to use send() to send values back into the yield inside the
> generator. When I want to use the generator, though, I have to
> essentially duplicate the machinery of a "for" loop, because the "for"
On Apr 17, 3:59 pm, Dale Roberts wrote:
> I've started using generators for some "real" work (love them!), and I
> need to use send() to send values back into the yield inside the
> generator. When I want to use the generator, though, I have to
> essentially duplicate the machinery of a "for" loop
I've started using generators for some "real" work (love them!), and I
need to use send() to send values back into the yield inside the
generator. When I want to use the generator, though, I have to
essentially duplicate the machinery of a "for" loop, because the "for"
loop does not have a mechanis
13 matches
Mail list logo
