On 25/03/20 9:14 am, Dennis Sweeney wrote:
I think my confusion is about just how precise this sort of "reference implementation" should be. Should it behave with ``str`` and ``tuple`` subclasses exactly how it would when implemented?
No, I don't think so. The purpose of a Python implementation of a proposed feature is to get the intended semantics across, not to reproduce all the quirks of an imagined C implementation. If you were to bake these details into a Python reference implementation, you would be implying that these are *intended* restrictions, which (unless I misunderstand) is not what you are intending. (Back when yield-fron was being designed, I described the intended semantics in prose, and gave an approximate Python equivalent, which went through several revisions as we thrashed out exactly how the feature should behave. But I don't think it ever exactly matched all the details of the actual implementation, nor was it intended to. The prose turned out to be much more readable, anway.:-) -- Greg