A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-July/026202.html below:

[Python-Dev] Single- vs. Multi-pass iterability

[Python-Dev] Single- vs. Multi-pass iterability [Python-Dev] Single- vs. Multi-pass iterabilityTim Peters tim.one@comcast.net
Mon, 08 Jul 2002 14:44:25 -0400
[David Abrahams]
> I keep running into the problem that there is no reliable way to
> introspect about whether a type supports multi-pass iterability (in the
> sense that an input stream might support only a single pass, but a list
> supports multiple passes). I suppose you could check for __getitem__, but
> that wouldn't cover linked lists, for example.
>
> Can anyone channel Guido's intent for me? Is this an oversight or a
> deliberate design decision? Is there an interface for checking
> multi-pass-ability that I've missed?

The language makes no such distinctions.  If an app wants to make them, it's
up to the app to implement them.  Likewise for a way to tell a multipass
iterator to "start over again".  The Python iteration protocol has only two
methods, .next() to get "the next" item, and .iter() to return self; given a
random iterator, those are the only things you can rely on.





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