为什么Python生成器函数与“常规”函数在语法上没有区别？

Question

我想知道，在阅读了Improve Your Python: 'yield' and Generators Explained中的生成器，但还没有对它们进行实验，为什么生成函数的语法符号与正则函数的语法符号没有区别。在我的思维实验中，最明显的选择是：

generator generator_name(param):
    # ...
    yield some_other_value

而不是：

^{pr2}$

现在，当人们阅读Python代码时，似乎需要先搜索单词“yield”，然后才能理解某个函数是一个生成器函数。或者，有没有Python约定要求生成器函数有一个指示性名称？像generate_some_value_from_y？在

Answer 1

引用PEP 255的话，将生成器引入Python的提议，其中Guido van Rossum（仁慈的生命独裁者，BDFL）解释了为什么没有单独的关键字：

Issue: Introduce another new keyword (say, gen or generator) in place of def, or otherwise alter the syntax, to distinguish generator-functions from non-generator functions.

Con: In practice (how you think about them), generators are functions, but with the twist that they're resumable. The mechanics of how they're set up is a comparatively minor technical issue, and introducing a new keyword would unhelpfully overemphasize the mechanics of how generators get started (a vital but tiny part of a generator's life).

Pro: In reality (how you think about them), generator-functions are actually factory functions that produce generator-iterators as if by magic. In this respect they're radically different from non-generator functions, acting more like a constructor than a function, so reusing def is at best confusing. A yield statement buried in the body is not enough warning that the semantics are so different.

BDFL: def it stays. No argument on either side is totally convincing, so I have consulted my language designer's intuition. It tells me that the syntax proposed in the PEP is exactly right - not too hot, not too cold. But, like the Oracle at Delphi in Greek mythology, it doesn't tell me why, so I don't have a rebuttal for the arguments against the PEP syntax. The best I can come up with (apart from agreeing with the rebuttals ... already made) is "FUD". If this had been part of the language from day one, I very much doubt it would have made Andrew Kuchling's "Python Warts" page.

本质上，生成函数生成生成器，而不是生成器本身。在