On Thu, 1 Feb 2001 03:31:33 -0800 (PST), Ka-Ping Yee <ping@lfw.org> wrote: [about for (k, v) in dict.iteritems(): ] > I remember considering this solution when i was writing the PEP. > The problem with it is that it isn't backward-compatible. It won't > work on existing dictionary-like objects -- it just introduces > another method that we then have to go back and implement on everything, > which kind of defeats the point of the whole proposal. Well, in that case we have differing views on the point of the whole proposal. I won't argue -- I think all the opinions have been aired, and it should be pronounced upon. > The other problem with this is that it isn't feasible in practice > unless 'for' can magically detect when the thing is a sequence and > when it's an iterator. I don't see any obvious solution to this dict.iteritems() could return not an iterator, but a magical object whose iterator is the requested iterator. Ditto itervalues(), iterkeys() -- Moshe Zadka <sig@zadka.site.co.il> This is a signature anti-virus. Please stop the spread of signature viruses! Fingerprint: 4BD1 7705 EEC0 260A 7F21 4817 C7FC A636 46D0 1BD6
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4