In article <83d579c1-ab61-4a3d-a834-e65d28eac...@googlegroups.com>, Rustom Mody <rustompm...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 8:59:22 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote: >> On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 11:34:27 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> > >> > A generator (function) may be a function which returns an iterator,... >> >> I find "generator-function" misleading in the same way that "pineapple" >> misleadingly suggests "apple that grows on pines" >> >> A builtin function is a function in the builtin (or builtins -- can >never remember) module >> A pure function is function that does not assign or mutate non-locals >> A Steven-function is a function that presumably Steven wrote >> >> However a "generator function" is a weird sort of function (at best). >> Not regarding it as a function is IMO more reasonable. > >Another analogy somewhat closer home than pineapples. >In Pascal there are procedures and functions. >Even in the venerable Fortran there are subroutine-subprogram and >(sub)function-subprogram.
The Algol 68 designers considered it a defect in the design. They created a situation like in Python, where a "def"-thingy need not return a value. > >C took the stupid approach of just throwing out one of these. >A decade of troubles was enough to convince people that it was needed and the >mysterious 'void-returning' function was introduced to simulate procedures The mistake this was intended to fix, was the rule that by default a function returns int in C. Groetjes Albert -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
