[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Change by Brett Cannon : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Brett Cannon added the comment: New changeset 99aad31b7ad493d4feea04064bcd6b04061477f9 by Brett Cannon in branch '3.10': [3.10] bpo-45250: fix docs regarding `__iter__` and iterators being inconsistently required by CPython (GH-29170) (GH-29650)

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Change by Brett Cannon : -- pull_requests: +27888 stage: -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/29650 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Brett Cannon added the comment: New changeset be36e0634060c7d5dee8e8876fb888bbb53d992a by Brett Cannon in branch 'main': bpo-45250: fix docs regarding `__iter__` and iterators being inconsistently required by CPython (GH-29170)

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Nir Friedman added the comment: Okay, fair enough. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Brett Cannon added the comment: > Wouldn't a nicer resolution for this be to change `iter` Unfortunately that isn't backwards-compatible. Some people may explicitly want their iterators to not be iterables to guarantee that people who want an iterator get a fresh/new one instead of reusing

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Nir Friedman 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

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Brett Cannon added the comment: I also need to leave a comment on https://github.com/python/typeshed/issues/6030 if/when this is fixed. -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Brett Cannon added the comment: > One thing I would strongly suggest for consistent terminology: Make > "iterator" mean an object that has both "__next()__" and "__iter()__". The point of this issue, though, is to not make that claim as it's inaccurate. -- stage: patch review ->

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Change by Brett Cannon : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +27443 stage: -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/29170 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

Sebastian Rittau added the comment: One thing I would strongly suggest for consistent terminology: Make "iterator" mean an object that has both "__next()__" and "__iter()__". This is consistent with how an iterator has been described in the glossary for a long time, but also consistent with

[issue45250] Make sure documentation is accurate for what an (async) iterable and (async) iterator are

New submission from Brett Cannon : There's some inaccuracies when it comes to iterable and iterators (async and not). See https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-...@python.org/thread/3W7TDX5KNVQVGT5CUHBK33M7VNTP25DZ/#3W7TDX5KNVQVGT5CUHBK33M7VNTP25DZ for background. Should probably