Matt Hammond wrote: >> Well, maybe it's right both ways ;-) I.e., even though yield "is" now >> an expression, it is valid to use it as an expression-statement which >> evaluates the expression and discards the value. So I think you could >> still use the currently illegal "yield in" token sequence to mean that >> what follows is to be taken as an iterable whose full sequence is >> to be yielded sequentially as if >> >> yield in iterable >> >> were sugar for >> >> for _ in iterable: yield _ > > "yield in" could make sense when thought of as an expression too. > > x = yield in iterable > > Would behave like a list comprehension. x would be assigned a list > containing > the results of the successive yields. Equivalent to: > > x = [ yield r for r in iterable ]
Which is quite different from x = (yield) in iterable which is currently (PEP 342) equivalent to _ = (yield) x = _ in iterable So, no further tinkering with yield, I'm afraid. Reinhold -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
