Skip to content

bpo-27646: Say that 'yield from' expression can be any iterable #24595

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 21, 2021
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions Doc/reference/expressions.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -478,8 +478,8 @@ allowing any pending :keyword:`finally` clauses to execute.
.. index::
single: from; yield from expression

When ``yield from <expr>`` is used, it treats the supplied expression as
a subiterator. All values produced by that subiterator are passed directly
When ``yield from <expr>`` is used, the supplied expression must be an
iterable. The values produced by iterating that iterable are passed directly
to the caller of the current generator's methods. Any values passed in with
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is "the current generator's methods" the correct term to use here? (Should it be "the current generator method" or something like that?)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good question. I believe the answer is yes, this part of the doc was and is correct. The 'current generator' is the one with 'yield from'. The two methods for getting yielded values are __next__ and send.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

methods could be expanded to '__next__' or 'send' method. (with markup). I notice that the two methods to pass things into the generator are explicitly named in the next sentence. What do you think?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see what you mean. Though I'm not sure "passed directly to the caller of ... " is that clear either. Maybe this whole sentence can be rephrased/simplified?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"The values produced by iterating that iterable form part of the current generator's output." or some such?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I want to stick with the defined scope of the issue, to replace the ambiguous or incorrect 'subiterator' in these two sentences, so it is clear what one can pass to 'yield from'. Do you have any comment on my replacements?. After sleeping on them, I think them good enough and am ready to merge.

I have also wondered about the exact meaning of 'passed directly', but the visible effect would what lines of code appear in a trace. Does 'passed directly' mean that the 'yield from' line would not appear? I suspect so; but if I cared I would run experiments. I consider this a separate issue.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, the part you changed looks fine.

:meth:`~generator.send` and any exceptions passed in with
:meth:`~generator.throw` are passed to the underlying iterator if it has the
Expand Down
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
Clarify that 'yield from <expr>' works with any iterable, not just
iterators.