On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:26:09 -0400, Random832 <random832 at fastmail.com> wrote: > "R. David Murray" <rdmurray at bitdance.com> writes: > > > On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:59:56 +0300, Stefan Mihaila > > <stefanmihaila91 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Maybe it's just python2 habits, but I assume I'm not the only one > >> carelessly thinking that "iterating over an input a second time will > >> result in the same thing as the first time (or raise an error)". > > > > This is the way iterators have always worked. > > It does raise the question though of what working code it would actually > break to have "exhausted" iterators raise an error if you try to iterate > them again rather than silently yield no items. They do raise an error: StopIteration. It's just that the iteration machinery uses that to stop iteration :). And the answer to the question is: lots of code. I've written some: code that iterates an iterator, breaks that loop on a condition, then resumes iterating, breaking that loop on a different condition, and so on, until the iterator is exhausted. If the iterator restarted at the top once it was exhausted, that code would break. --David
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