[Python-Dev] Withdrawn PEP 288 and thoughts on PEP 342

[Raymond Hettinger]

 [Phillip]
> I could definitely go for dropping __next__ and the next() builtin
from
> PEP
> 342, as they don't do anything extra.  I also personally don't care
about
> the new continue feature, so I could do without for-loop alteration
> too.  I'd be perfectly happy passing arguments to next() explicitly; I
> just
> want yield expressions.

That's progress!  Please do what you can to get the non-essential
changes out of 342.




> >Meanwhile, it hasn't promised any advantages over the dead PEP 288
> >proposals.
> 
> Reading the comments in PEP 288's revision history, it sounds like the
> argument was to postpone implementation of next(arg) and yield
expressions
> to a later version of Python, after more community experience with
> generators.  We've had that experience now.

288 was brought out of retirement a few months ago.  Guido hated every
variation of argument passing and frequently quipped that data passing
was trivially accomplished though mutable arguments to a generator,
through class based iterators, or via a global variable.  I believe all
of those comments were made recently and they all apply equally to 342.


Raymond