Wouldn't "iterkeys" simply be an alias for "keys" and so on? I'm +1 on that. It is a signigificant portion of the incompatibility, and seems like such a minor concession to compatibility to make. K
-----Original Message----- From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-bounces+kristjan=ccpgames....@python.org] On Behalf Of Antoine Pitrou Sent: 19. apríl 2014 09:36 To: python-dev@python.org Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 469: Restoring the iterkeys/values/items() methods On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 22:31:29 -0400 Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > After spending some time talking to the folks at the PyCon Twisted > sprints, they persuaded me that adding back the iterkeys/values/items > methods for mapping objects would be a nice way to eliminate a key > porting hassle for them (and likely others), without significantly > increasing the complexity of Python 3. I'm -1 on this. This is destroying the simplification effort of the dict API in Python 3. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/kristjan%40ccpgames.com _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
