Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> In the case of iter(collection), I prefer the current wording because the
> target object need not support __iter__, it is sufficient
> to supply a sequential __getitem__ method.
Seems to me that should be included in the definition of
an iterable -- i.e. anything for
Raymond Hettinger schrieb:
> The docs do make a distinction and generally follow the definitions given in
> the glossary for the tuturial.
>
> In the case of iter(collection), I prefer the current wording because the
> target object need not support __iter__, it is sufficient to supply a
> sequent
The docs do make a distinction and generally follow the definitions given in
the glossary for the tuturial.
In the case of iter(collection), I prefer the current wording because the
target object need not support __iter__, it is sufficient
to supply a sequential __getitem__ method.
Raymond
Calvin Spealman wrote:
> This might indicate that it is using "collection" where I would say
> "iterable". Also, the same docstring makes mention of something being
> an iterator _or_ a sequence, so I also should bring up that it may be
> antiquated, yes?
http://docs.python.org/dev/lib/typeiter.ht
