Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #94041 > unrolled thread

Re: Proposed keyword to transfer control to another function

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Proposed keyword to transfer control to another function Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au> - 2015-07-18 09:31 +1000

#94041 — Re: Proposed keyword to transfer control to another function

On 17Jul2015 20:43, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Antoon Pardon
><antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>> On 07/17/2015 01:46 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> Open for bikeshedding: What should the keyword be? We can't use
>>> "exec", which would match Unix and shell usage, because it's already
>>> used in a rather different sense in Python. Current candidates:
>>> "transfer", "goto", "recurse", and anything else you suggest.
>>
>> I propose the combination "return from". I think it is similar enough
>> with "yield from" to justify this and it also won't need an extra
>> keyword, so no programs will be broken because they used "transfer",
>> "goto" or whatever other new keyword as an identifier.
>>
>
>Oooh I like this. The parallel makes sense, and as you say, no new
>keyword. Yes, "return from" is my new preferred command!

+1

Cheers,
Cameron Simpson <cs@zip.com.au>

A pessimist is an optimist in full possession of the facts.

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web