Prev: Interesting talk on Python vs. Ruby and how he would like Python to have just a bit more syntactic flexibility.
Next: with statement and standard library
From: Steven D'Aprano on 19 Feb 2010 01:00
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:52:20 +1300, Gregory Ewing wrote:

> The Ruby approach has the advantage of making it possible to implement
> user-defined control structures without requiring a macro facility. You
> can't do that in Python.
[...]
> Also, most people who advocate adding some form of block-passing
> facility to Python don't seem to have thought through what would happen
> if the block contains any break, continue, return or yield statements.

That is the only time I ever wanted blocks: I had a series of functions
containing for loops that looked something vaguely like this:

for x in sequence:
code_A
try:
something
except some_exception:
code_B

where code_B was different in each function, so I wanted to pull it out
as a code block and do this:


def common_loop(x, block):
code_A
try:
something
except some_exception:
block

for x in sequence:
common_loop(x, block)


The problem was that the blocks contained a continue statement, so I was
stymied.


--
Steven
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Interesting talk on Python vs. Ruby and how he would like Python to have just a bit more syntactic flexibility.
Next: with statement and standard library