Camion <camion_spam-pyb...@yahoo.com> added the comment:

@Serhiy : I asked you to explain by what mean you supported the affirmation 
that our feeling (that the current message can be misleading in the specific 
situation) is wrong, but you didn't give us any element to understand your 
position. Steven and I did it: I gave you a sample code showing how and why a 
situation could be misinterpreted in regard of the current message, and Steven 
explained that as an experience python programmer, he experienced the same 
misunderstanding (I'm also an experienced programmer: started in the eighties, 
I'm new in Python only).

May be, if you gave us some sound argument element, we could also better 
understand the reason why you affirm that our feeling is wrong. Because in the 
current situation, you only declared your own feeling, but didn't give it any 
support, and all we can conclude is that you are a very experienced python 
programmer who can understand what was beyond the text of the message, but it 
seems in contradiction with the principle of making things clear.

--------------------

@Raymond : I do not understand how you make the link between both your 
affirmations. The initial problem is related with the fact that in some 
situation, the error message lead to think that there is a problem with the 
loop/generator/iterator, where the problem is in reality with a simple type 
which cannot be unpacked or iterated. 

Let's assume that the interpreter could never make the difference. In what way, 
does it support the fact that the message shouldn't in any way, hint the 
programmer on the fact that the problem is not with the 
generator/iterator/loop, but with the returned type ?

--------------------

@Steven (& everybody), 
How about : "[TYPE] object is not iterable/unpackable" ?

--------------------

About patching the sources in c, the message "object is not iterable" appears 
in four places in the version 3.6.3 : in ./Objects/object.c:1023, twice in 
./Objects/typeobject.c (lines 6329 & 6344), and in ./Objects/abstract.c:3135. I 
have patched them to make them recognizable from one another, and it appear 
that all observed messages have been generated from abstract.c:3135 (in 3.6.3) 
and not from the other lines.

This poses problem, because not even the regression test show a case where 
those other 3 parts of the code are used, and I haven't figured out (yet?) what 
condition makes them occur.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue32259>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to