On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Grant Edwards <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 2009-09-25, Piet van Oostrum <p...@cs.uu.nl> wrote: >>>>>>> exar...@twistedmatrix.com (e) wrote: >> >>>e> I specifically left out all "yield" statements in my version, since that's >>>e> exactly the point here. :) With "real" coroutines, they're not necessary >>>- >>>e> coroutine calls look just like any other call. With Python's enhanced >>>e> generators, they are. >> >> The first time I encountered coroutines was in Simula-67. Coroutine >> switching was certainly explicit there. IIRC, the keyword was resume. > > I'm not sure exactly what "coroutine calls" refers to, but the > "mis-feature" in Python co-routines that's being discussed is > the fact that you can only yeild/resume from the main coroutine > function. > > You can't call a function that yields control back to the other > coroutine(s). By jumping through some hoops you can get the > same effect, but it's not very intuitive and it sort of "feels > wrong" that the main routine has to know ahead of time when > calling a function whether that function might need to yield or > not.
You mean a "trampoline" function? I.e. you have to call into your coroutines in a special main function that expects as part of the yielded value(s) the next coroutine to pass control to, and your coroutines all need to yield the next coroutine? ~Simon -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
