Style question on recursive generators
Alex Martelli
aleaxit at yahoo.com
Mon Oct 18 10:27:43 EDT 2004
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Mon Oct 18 10:27:43 EDT 2004
- Previous message (by thread): Style question on recursive generators
- Next message (by thread): Style question on recursive generators
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Carlos Ribeiro <carribeiro at gmail.com> wrote: ... > Yes, that's a good point, and it's one of the reasons I tend to prefer > the generator now. But anyway, it's just me, or does the 'chained > yield' look ugly to someone else? It may be just a question of getting > used to it, but nevertheless it's bugging me... I'm not sure why it should look ugly to you. What alternatives would you consider non-ugly for the common (in any generator) idiom: for x in y: yield x ? Perhaps some syntax hack such as a new statement keyword 'yieldall' where the above idiom could be expressed as yieldall y ? Or some other syntax hack such as 'yield<<y', or 'yield from y', ditto? Personally, it would seem to me that such special syntax would be just one more bit of Python to learn, without substantial benefits, but that's because I see nothing ugly in today's idiom -- it does just what it says, plainly and unpretentiously... Alex
- Previous message (by thread): Style question on recursive generators
- Next message (by thread): Style question on recursive generators
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list