RetroSearch Browse

Sat May 7 00:30:22 CEST 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053486.html

On Fri, 6 May 2005, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> There's one alternative possible (still orthogonal to PEP 340):
> instead of __next__(), we could add an optional argument to the next()
> method, and forget about the next() built-in.

I prefer your original proposal.  I think this is a good time to switch
to next().  If we are going to change the protocol, let's do it right.

-- ?!ng

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-May/053486.html below:

[Python-Dev] Breaking off Enhanced Iterators PEP from PEP 340