[Python-ideas] The async API of the future: yield-from

Greg Ewing greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz
Tue Oct 16 07:39:20 CEST 2012

Nick Coghlan wrote:
> (this is why I disagree with Greg that
> "yield from" can serve as the one true API - it doesn't handle partial
> iteration, and it doesn't handle pre- or post- processing around the
> suspension points while iterating).

I'm aware of the iteration problem, but I'm not convinced
that the convolutions necessary to make it possible to use
a for-loop for this are worth the bother, as opposed to
simply accepting that you can't use the for statement in
this situation, and using some other kind of loop.

In any case, even if we decide to provide a scheduler
instruction to enable using for-loops on suspendable
iterators somehow, it doesn't follow that we should use
scheduler instructions for anything *else*.

I would consider such a scheduler instruction to be a stopgap
measure until we can find a better solution -- just as
yield-from is a better solution than using "call" and "return"
scheduler instructions.


More information about the Python-ideas mailing list