[Python-Dev] accumulator display syntax

[Tim Peters]

[Tim]
>> This is easy to explain, and trivial to explain for people familiar
>> with the default-argument trick.

[Guido]
> Phillip Eby already recommended not bothering with that; the
> default-argument rule is actually confusing for newbies (they think
> the defaults are evaluated at call time) so it's best not to bring
> this into the picture.

Of course it works equally well to pass regular (non-default) arguments, it
just makes a precise explanation a little longer to type (because the
arglist needs to be typed out in two places).

> ..
> OK, I got it now.  I hope we can find another real-life example; but
> there were some other early toy examples that also looked quite
> convincing.

I expect we will find more, although I haven't had more time to think about
it (and today was devoted to puzzling over excessive rates of ZODB conflict
errors, where generator expressions didn't seem immediately applicable
<wink>).

I do think it's related to non-reiterablity.  If generator expressions were
reiterable, then a case could be made for them capturing a parameterized
computation, reusable for different things by varying the bindings of the
free variables.  Like, say, you wanted to plot the squares of various
functions at a set of points, and then:

    squares = (f(x)**2 for x in inputs)  # assuming reiterability here

    for f in math.sin, math.cos, math.tan:
        plot(squares)

But that doesn't make sense for a one-shot (not reiterable) generator, and
even if it were reiterable I can't think of a real example that would want
the bindings of free variables to change *during* a single pass over the
results.  For that matter, if it were reiterable, the "control by obscure
side effect" style of the example is hard to like anyway.