[Python-Dev] [SPAM: 3.000] [issue11682] PEP 380 reference implementation for 3.3 (original) (raw)
Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Thu Nov 10 02:50:34 CET 2011
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] [SPAM: 3.000] [issue11682] PEP 380 reference implementation for 3.3
- Next message: [Python-Dev] [SPAM: 3.000] [issue11682] PEP 380 reference implementation for 3.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
On 10/11/11 11:43, Tim Delaney wrote:
We have precedent for being more restrictive initially, and relaxing those restrictions later. I suggest that the more restrictive implementation go in now so that people can start playing with it. If the discussion comes to a consensus on more relaxed syntax, that can be added later (either in 3.3 or a later release). That's fair enough. I'll shut up now.
No worries - given the dance you had to go through in the Grammar file to make it work in the first place, I should have realised you'd done it deliberately. (The mention of the 'yield_from' node in the doc patch I was reviewing is actually what got me looking into this).
As I said earlier, I'd actually be amenable to making it legal to omit the extra parentheses for both yield & yield from in the single argument case where there's no ambiguity (following the generator expression precedent), but that's a tricky change given the parser limitations. The way your patch tried to do it also allowed "f(yield from x, 1)" which strikes me as being far too confusing to a human reader, even if the parser understands it.
Cheers, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] [SPAM: 3.000] [issue11682] PEP 380 reference implementation for 3.3
- Next message: [Python-Dev] [SPAM: 3.000] [issue11682] PEP 380 reference implementation for 3.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]