Paul Moore wrote:
> Hmm, it took me a while to get this, but what you're ssaying is that
> if you modify Guido's "what I really want" solution to use
>
> VAR = next(it, exc)
>
> then this builtin next makes "API v2" stuff using __next__ work while
> remaining backward compatible with old-style "API v1" stuff using
> 0-arg next() (as long as old-style stuff isn't used in a context where
> an exception gets passed back in).
Yes, but it could also be used (almost) anywhere an explicit obj.next() is
used.
it = iter(seq)
while True:
print next(it)
for loops would also change to use builtin next() rather than calling
it.next() directly.
> I'd suggest that the new builtin have a "magic" name (__next__ being
> the obvious one :-)) to make it clear that it's an internal
> implementation detail.
There aren't many builtins that have magic names, and I don't think this
should be one of them - it has obvious uses other than as an implementation
detail.
> PS The first person to replace builtin __next__ in order to implement
> a "next hook" of some sort, gets shot :-)
Damn! There goes the use case ;)
Tim Delaney
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