-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 5, 2007, at 1:36 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> -1. I dislike the introduction of more builtins unless they have a > true > generality (i.e. are likely to be needed in many programs). For this > one, I think the normal usage of __next__ will be with a for loop, so > I don't think one would often need an explicit next() invocation. I have had occasional need to call .next() explicitly. IIRC the code in question was handed an iterator but only needed the first object out of the iterator. It would be really ugly to have to use __next__ () or force a once-through for loop. OTOH, making iterators callable as equivalent to .next() as I think Raymond suggested sounds about perfect. You get __next__(), plus explicit iteration with no additional built in necessary. - -Barry -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBRexk/XEjvBPtnXfVAQIq0gP+KULlyQNTAEsrxqQIQYO8e5eP/zbIazsa idKofJaQVEp9QbpIUBWj4RdzfesEkhjhy3dtNo3APGMCej4YsPhuHQMeoucVSKA/ 1FUXwyVUliqa4yrN9pFadXYTd9dZcep++Hbgb76REp2wUejdNkO0k/lnIZ0JERcv 33Wt64r21x4= =ZWgi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 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
