At 07:02 05.11.2003 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > Among the comp.lang.python crowd, nearly everyone supported some form of > > the PEP (with varying preferences on the name or where to put it). The > > community participation rate was high with about 120 posts across four > > threads contributing to hammering out the current version of the pep. > >How many participants in those 120 posts? (I recall a thread where >one individual posted 100 messages. :-) > > > Is there anything else that needs to be done in the way of research, > > voting, or cheerleading for pep to be accepted? > >Yes. I'm getting cold feet about __reversed__. Some folks seem to >think that reversed() can be made to work on many iterators by having >the iterator supply __reversed__; I think this is asking for trouble >(e.g. you already pointed out why it couldn't be done for >enumerate()). yes, but __reversed__ is meanigful for iterables not iterators I had the impression that reversed(.) is related to iter(.) for reverse iteration and __reversed__ would correspond to __iter__ also for that, but this is meanigful for iterables that are not already iterators. For iterators __iter__ is typically the identity, while __reversed__ is not really applicable which probably means that reverse iteration is more complicated that forward iteration <wink>. regards.
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