Mark Dickinson added the comment: This seems like an attractive idea. There's definitely a need for repeated unpacking with the same pattern, and I agree that putting the repetition into the pattern is suboptimal (not least from the point of view of caching structs).
One thing that feels a bit unorthogonal is that this is doing two things at once: both allowing for repetition of a pattern, and also adding the lazy iteration. I'd guess that there's also a use-case for allowing repetition but not returning an iterator; but then that's easily covered by list(iter_unpack). +1 from me. Hmm; the name. 'iterunpack'? 'iter_unpack'? 'unpack_stream'? 'unpack_all'? Would we want something similar for packing, too? I guess that's effectively covered by b''.join(s.pack(item) for item in ...). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17804> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
