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/026602.html below:

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

[Python-Dev] Single- vs. Multi-pass iterabilityAndrew Koenig ark@research.att.com
Mon, 15 Jul 2002 23:22:46 -0400 (EDT)
David> I'm with you on the desire to have a way to get a
David> multipass-iterator-or-error in one swell foop. That says "I
David> want to iterate over this thing without changing it". I still
David> think that hasattr(iter(x), '__copy__') is a pretty clean way
David> to do that, despite the fact that it potentially creates an
David> iterator (which some people apparently view as too heavyweight
David> as an introspection step).

In particular, creating an iterator had better not be a destructive operation.

David> However, I don't see any point in trying to define a protocol
David> for every different possible iteration view of a thing. Dicts
David> have keys, values, and items. Trees have breadth-first,
David> depth-first, inorder, postorder, blah, blah, blah. There are
David> just too many of these, and they're all different.

I wasn't suggesting defining a protocol for every possible iteration
view.  I was raising the question of whether multi-pass iteration
was likely to be a common enough operation that it is worth defining
a protocol for it, while leaving the door open to defining protocols
for others should it turn out to be desirable to do so.








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