Author terry.reedy
Recipients berker.peksag, ethan.furman, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan, petr.viktorin, terry.reedy, yselivanov
Date 2015-05-02.00:21:25
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1430526086.14.0.0378078320709.issue24056@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Describing generator functions as such is a great idea.  But how about
    <generator function f at 0x7f7dad9f7bf8>

Marking closure functions as such is a bit more subtle. However, there ia a real point that closure functions have a hidden input.  If it is mutated or rebound, the function will not be deterministic with respect to its overt input arguments.  Closure functions are similar to methods in this respect.

Await functions (Guido's name choice as of today), if the PEP is approved, will also need to be identified as such.  I propose a uniform format of no prefix, a single prefic or a (tuple) of prefixes.
History
Date User Action Args
2015-05-02 00:21:26terry.reedysetrecipients: + terry.reedy, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan, petr.viktorin, ethan.furman, berker.peksag, yselivanov
2015-05-02 00:21:26terry.reedysetmessageid: <1430526086.14.0.0378078320709.issue24056@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2015-05-02 00:21:26terry.reedylinkissue24056 messages
2015-05-02 00:21:25terry.reedycreate