Nir Friedman <quick...@gmail.com> added the comment:
Wouldn't a nicer resolution for this be to change `iter` (which effectively defines what is "iterable"), so that if `iter` does not find the `__iter__` or sequence protocol, it then looks for the iterator protocol (`__next__`), and if it finds that, return the argument? In that way, all iterators would automatically get the sane implementation of `__iter__` by default, and we could say that in the "runtime", all iterators are iterable, matching the types. And people wouldn't need to implement `__iter__` any more on their iterators i.e. the recommendation could simply be dropped). ---------- nosy: +quicknir _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue45250> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
