Calling a generator multiple times

[Just van Rossum]

Courageous wrote:

> Explain to me, very carefully now, why I should have to read
> a language designer's doc in order to consider for a moment how
> your average user will encounter a language construct?

Fair enough. Still, sometimes you need a little background before
new concepts sink in. Look at the problems people coming from
languages like C are having with the concept of name binding.
Sometimes you need to reset your brain.

> For the record, yes, I have read this PEP. It's the very first
> thing that I did before mucking around with generators and
> before posting even my first message regarding generators here.

Great, that's good to know.

> Pronouncements like the following: "so I have consulted my
> language designer's intuition. It tells me that the syntax
> proposed in the PEP is exactly right" aren't exactly persuasive,
> especially when you consider the paragraph that immediately
> preceeds this decree.

I have no idea what you mean with that last sentence. I think all
that Guido tried to say is something like "We could do A or we
could do B. Arguments either way aren't completely convincing,
so I'll just do whatever I think is best." What's so bad about
that? Your attitude of "this is so obviously wrong, what have
they been thinking" however, is pretty insulting, especially
since you don't say anything that hasn't been discussed 1000
times in the iterators mailing list.

Just