Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan at stoneleaf.us> wrote: >> Nick Coghlan wrote: >>> Collapsing the address list has to build the result list anyway to >>> actually handle the deduplication part of its job, so returning a >>> concrete list makes sense in that case. >> >> Having only one function return a list instead of an iterator seems >> questionable. >> >> Depending on the code it could either keep track of what it has returned so >> far in a set and avoid duplication that way; or, just return an >> `iter(listobject)` instead of `listobject`. > > I know I'm lacking context, but is the list ever expected to be huge? > If not, what's wrong with always returning a list? Nothing wrong in and of itself. It just seems to me that if we have several functions that deal with ip addresses/networks/etc, and all but one return iterators, that one is going to be a pain... 'Which one returns a list again? Oh yeah, that one.' Granted it's mostly a stylistic preference for consistency. ~Ethan~
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