On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
In my opinion, this is an attractive nuisance.
-1 on the feature.
Agreed (and my preferred idiom for all the cited cases is also "always define the Python version, override at the end with the accelerated version"). Although, if we *did* do it, I think allowing "return" at module level would be the way to proceed (as Mark Shannon noted, that's only *disallowed* now because the compiler specifically prevents it. The eval loop itself understands it just fine and ceases execution as soon as it encounters the relevant bytecode. It isn't quite as simple as just deleting those lines though, since we likely still wouldn't want to allow return statements in class bodies). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia