> > Where was this agreed upon? > > Perhaps I overstepped. It's been on my todo list for a > couple of months and didn't seem to be even slightly > controversial. > > > > __iter__ returning self doesn't sound very generic to me, > > so at the very least the name should be changed IMO. > > Thomas suggested PyObject_GetSelfIter, PyObject_GenericSelfIter, > or PyObject_SelfIter. Consistent with the other tp_slot fillers, I > suggest PyObject_GenericIter. The "generic" functions aren't just slot fillers, they do a lot of work that is typical for most types. The self-iter, OTOH, doesn't do what most types' iterators need -- it only does what most *iterators* need for their own iterator. So a name with 'Self' in it is more appropriate. I'd pick PyObject_SelfIter. > > Also, adding a standard API for a helper function this > > trivial doesn't really make sense to me. > > This identical code was duplicated in a dozen different > modules in the same context. It comes up when writing > most iterators and needed to be factored out. "Need" is a strong word. It's okay to add this little convenience, but please give it a proper name. Maybe some day we'll have a true generic iterator helper too. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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