Please comment on Draft PEP for Enhanced Generators

[Pete Shinners]

Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> I have written a draft PEP summarizing proposed enhancements to generators:
> http://users.javanet.com/~othello/download/genpep.htm
> 
> The draft reflects all the comments I've received to date on the threads
> where
> the ideas where first proposed.
> 
> Please post your comments (and maybe a little encouragment) here on
> comp.lang.py or email them directly to me.

i have one small request for generators. it may actually be a bad idea 
but i sure can't guess why it would be. perhaps it can be added to your 
PEP if it is going to get implemented. it sure looks good to me, so i 
hope it does get implented.


anyways, i would like the be able to simply call "yield" with no 
arguments and have it yield None. basically the same as the "return" 
keyword works.

i want to use generators like little mini-threads, and really don't care 
about what it really yields. in my current tests i've just done "yield 
0" or "yield None", but i think the code would be clearer if i just 
could say "yield".

interesting ideas on the 'two way yield'. i'm curious to see what comes 
of that :]