On Tue, Jul 16, 2002, Greg Ewing wrote: > Guido: >> Greg: >>> >>> If the file object were to become an object obeying the iterator >>> protocol, its next() method should really return the next *byte* of >>> the file. >> >> I don't think so. We should pick the most convenient chunking for the >> default iterator > > But we're talking here about making the file object *be* an iterator > itself, not just have a "default iterator". If that's to happen, all > the other ways of iterating over a file ought to be implemented on top > of the basic iteration facility provided by the file object -- lest we > get unfortunate interactions between the different iteration methods a > la xreadlines(). To me, this implies that the file object must iterate > by bytes. "Practicality beats purity" -- Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ Project Vote Smart: http://www.vote-smart.org/
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