generators improvement

[Duncan Booth]

Oleg Leschov <kalmas at udm.ru> wrote in 
news:bhtiij$psc$2 at ocasysi.rubbernet.net:

> What needs to be done is to allow yield return something - whatever was
> passed to the .next() thing from caller..
> Easy and obvious, isn't it? So is there any principal problem with this 
> idea that would prevents its implementation?

Please read PEP 288, http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0288.html
in particular the section:

> Rejected Alternative
>     One idea for passing data into a generator was to pass an argument
>     through next() and make a assignment using the yield keyword:
> 
>         datain = yield dataout
>           . . .
>         dataout = gen.next(datain)
> 
>     The intractable problem is that the argument to the first next() call
>     has to be thrown away, because it doesn't correspond to a yield
>     keyword.




-- 
Duncan Booth                                             duncan at rcp.co.uk
int month(char *p){return(124864/((p[0]+p[1]-p[2]&0x1f)+1)%12)["\5\x8\3"
"\6\7\xb\1\x9\xa\2\0\4"];} // Who said my code was obscure?