Re: Re: [VOTE] Generators

On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 18:02:40 +0200, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com> wrote:

The vote ended with 24 in favor and one against. As such the RFC is accepted.

I've merged Nikita's branch in 53351d0. As to the "exception objection": the behavior of throwing exceptions on illegal state was written on the RFC when voting opened, and the RFC was accepted almost unanimously. As the proposal was accepted as such, I saw no valid reason not to merge. In fact, changing the proposal after it was voted on would be much more objectionable. Derick argues this is some sort of tacit change of the design rules of the language, with the objection against exception throwing relying also on the user's ignorance that generators return a Generator object (though he also chose not to vote against the proposal). I don't find his arguments persuasive, but, in any case, the issue can be adjudicated by the community through an RFC that establishes either a clear general policy for exception throwing or handles just this particular case. -- Gustavo Lopes