Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 11/18/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> (Although I will point out
>> that most protocols for things like len() *do* involve checks for
>> special
>> methods by name, and the check for iterability is typically a
>> non-destructive
>> call to iter(x), rather than a destructive one to x.next()).
>
> Ouch?! I would never check for iterability explicitly. I would just
> require it, as Greg Ewing says. iter() could be fairly expensive,
> depending on what is being iterated over.
I didn't mean to imply that the call to iter() couldn't be an implicit one in
a for loop/genexp/listcomp/itertool. As you say, the need to check explicitly
is rare.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
