On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 09:41:01AM -0500, Raymond Hettinger wrote: > > Thomas suggested PyObject_GetSelfIter, PyObject_GenericSelfIter, > > or PyObject_SelfIter. Consistent with the other tp_slot fillers, I > > suggest PyObject_GenericIter. > A couple of other thoughts. While Thomas found the "getiter" part > of the name to be unintuitive, the type of the slot is named (getiterfunc) > and most of the replaced functions had names like dictiter_getiter, > enum_getiter, iter_getiter, listiter_getiter, xreadlines_getiter ... > So, my first preference is the name in the subject line. But my original point still stands. dictiter_getiter, enum_getiter, iter_getiter are all fairly clear: they get the iter for an (existing) dictiter/enum/iter object. PyObject_GenericGetIter does not return an iterator for a generic object, it's a generic way to return an iterator *for an iterator*. PyIter_GenericGetIter, PyObject_IterGetIter, etc are all more descriptive. I also agree with Guido on that this should not be a public API function (and if it is, it should be documented <wink>.) Functions that aren't part of the public API but can't be static should be prefixed with _Py. -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
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