On Nov 16, 3:36 pm, Thomas Mlynarczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Arnaud Delobelle schrieb:
>
> > If you want to simply 'set' the generator (by which I take you mean
> > 'change its state') without without iterating it one step, then what you
> > need is a class with an __iter__() method. Then you can change the
> > state of the object between calls to next(). E.g.
> >>>> class MyGenerator(object):
> > ... def __init__(self, v): self.v = v
> > ... def __iter__(self):
> > ... for x in range(10):
> > ... yield self.v
> > ...
> >>>> g = MyGenerator(5)
> >>>> for i in g:
> > ... g.v = input("val:")
> > ... print i
>
> That's a good idea, thanks! Meanwhile I have succeeded in writing a
> decorator which allows an argument for next():
Here's a different structure if you want it. Untested.
def myway( g ):
def init( *ar, **kw ):
g= g( *ar, **kw )
class mygen( object ):
def __iter__( self ):
return self
def next( self, s= None ):
return g.next() if s is None else g.send( s )
def send( self, s ):
return g.send( s )
return mygen
return init
And, if you don't intend to use 'myway' on 'listiterator's and such,
'send( None )' is equivalent to 'next( )'.
def myway( g ):
def init( *ar, **kw ):
g= g( *ar, **kw )
class mygen( object ):
def __iter__( self ):
return self
def next( self, s= None ):
return g.send( s )
def send( self, s ):
return g.send( s )
return mygen
return init
There's probably a typo in it.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
