Message245210
| Author | ncoghlan |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Ben.Darnell, Yury.Selivanov, asvetlov, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, scoder, vstinner, yselivanov |
| Date | 2015-06-12.05:46:44 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1434088005.75.0.236214578639.issue24400@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Low level review sent. Regarding the new opcode, it appears the main thing it provides is early detection of yielding from a coroutine in a normal generator, which is never going to work properly (a for loop or other iterative construct can't drive a coroutine as it expects to be driven), but would be incredibly painful to debug if you did it accidentally. For me, that counts as a good enough reason to add a new opcode during the beta period (just as adding the new types is necessary to fix various problems with the original not-actually-a-different-type implementation). |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2015-06-12 05:46:45 | ncoghlan | set | recipients: + ncoghlan, gvanrossum, scoder, vstinner, asvetlov, Yury.Selivanov, Ben.Darnell, yselivanov |
| 2015-06-12 05:46:45 | ncoghlan | set | messageid: <1434088005.75.0.236214578639.issue24400@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2015-06-12 05:46:45 | ncoghlan | link | issue24400 messages |
| 2015-06-12 05:46:44 | ncoghlan | create | |