"Douglas Alan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > We can shorten the code--and make it run in O(N) time--by adding a > new > keyword to replace the "for v in ...: yield v" pattern:
Maybe. Until you define the semantics of yield_all and at least outline an implementation, I am not convinced of 'run in o(n) time'. There was once a several-post discussion of a related idea of having yield somehow, magically, skip intermediate generators that only yielded value on up, without tranformation. But it was never clear how to do this practically without negatively impacting all generators. Cetainly, if <yield_all iterator> == <for i in iterator: yield i>, I don't see how anything is gained except for a few keystrokes. If <yield_all iterator> == <yield list(i for i in iterator)> then the replacement is a semantic change. > def in_order(self): > if self.left is not None: > yield_all self.left.in_order(): > yield self.value > if self.right is not None: > yield_all self.right.in_order(): If and when I write a text-based double-recursion to iteration transformer, a pseudokeyword might be be an idea for indicating that stacked yields are identify functions and therefore bypassable. Terry J. Reedy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
