Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.076 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.85; '*S*': 0.00; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.09; '22,': 0.09; 'wed,': 0.15; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'gregory': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'archive': 0.18; '>>>': 0.20; '2015': 0.20; 'cc:2**0': 0.20; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.20; 'arguments': 0.22; 'rapidly': 0.22; 'am,': 0.23; 'written': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'all.': 0.24; "doesn't": 0.26; 'chris': 0.26; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'fine': 0.28; 'initial': 0.28; 'pep': 0.29; "i'd": 0.31; 'anyone': 0.32; 'maybe': 0.33; 'point': 0.33; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'something': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'needed': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'say': 0.37; 'someone': 0.38; "didn't": 0.39; 'easily': 0.39; 'your': 0.60; 'personally': 0.61; 'more': 0.63; 'jul': 0.72; '"here\'s': 0.84; 'chrisa': 0.84; 'conclusions': 0.84; 'construct': 0.84; 'guido.': 0.84; 'pardon': 0.84; 'to:none': 0.91 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=irh7elwdL78+hIw6bFwAdYKX3cuU6SWv8o7j2dmBzZE=; b=CJR/STzQet/SGb/XulskyL+VtXZKpkCcWQn9bu5m2xl/5FRG14uhc4PLQgVsLqbWMT pHwCIAbbQcMsFjhCwAwP78ZYRMbdOOBv0Ps+EczWay2aaFPsyDhPk8W0BPBh10QwITWG SEk8G9fcMIUg+pi1wWOtyjdaYvkV9URmObvGWzZSHxqf37Ipfiwt8e7O3Oc1NcSKF0Rv O8TKtbSpIhzkgoz24c4QR/+rLRBQxEx08DgVHClsFrvCULN0zmMVYJ0WXexkQ8fF2oMz /KBQw2HC4D9KskuIwQEBnDa72gtvVwDVm5OHiWC+SOWEeBUS+/8TzvyHBYSJi7C6tzua IHUw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.107.4.1 with SMTP id 1mr44895398ioe.10.1437500286874; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 10:38:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55AE8255.5000704@rece.vub.ac.be> References: <55AE8255.5000704@rece.vub.ac.be> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 03:38:06 +1000 Subject: Re: Proposed keyword to transfer control to another function From: Chris Angelico Cc: "python-list@python.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 25 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1437500296 news.xs4all.nl 2855 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:44237 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:94305 On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: > On 07/19/2015 02:21 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Gregory Ewing >> wrote: > >>> Personally I'd be fine with your initial syntax, but >>> something else might be needed to get it past Guido. >>> He didn't like my 'cocall f()' construct in PEP 3152, >>> which is syntactically isomorphic to 'transfer f()'. >> >> Maybe it should get written up and rejected, then, to be something to >> point to any time anyone advocates TCO. > > Those who remember the history of pep 308 will not find > that a strong deterrent. It doesn't have to be a deterrent. It just has to say "Here's all the arguments we came up with in 2015, so find answers to those if you want to reopen the debate". It's effectively a way of rapidly onboarding the conclusions from a lengthy discussion, much more easily than pointing someone to the archive and expecting him/her to read through it all. ChrisA