yield_all needed in Python

[Andrew Dalke]

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:25:51 -0500, Douglas Alan wrote:
> While writing a generator, I was just thinking how Python needs a
> "yield_all" statement.  With the help of Google, I found a pre-existing
> discussion on this from a while back in the Lightweight Languages
> mailing list.  I'll repost it here in order to improve the chances of
> this enhancement actually happening someday.

You should also have looked for the responses to that. Tim Peter's
response is available from
  http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/624273
as linked from
  http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/python-dev/758572
Here is the most relevant parts.

   I'm not bothered -- this comes with the territory.  If/when
   full-fledged coroutines make it in too, people worried about that can
   use them instead.  Curious fact:  I *was* worried about the worst-case
   time aspects of "simple generators" in Icon years ago, but in practice
   never ever got burned by it. And rewriting stuff to use Icon
   co-expressions instead invariably resulted in messier code that ran
   significantly slower in virtually all cases, except for the ones I
   *contrived* to prove the O() difference.

   BTW, Python almost never worries about worst-case behavior, and people
   using Python dicts instead of, e.g., balanced trees, get to carry their
   shame home with them hours earlier each day <wink> .

				Andrew
				dalke at dalkescientific.com