That's useful information... most of my motivation for iterChildren() was to be consistent with other python methods like iteritems(), iterkeys(), etc., so if that's going away then I'm less motivated to stick with it. I haven't played with python3 so I didn't know that. See, I told you that you were atypical...
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 10:50 PM, nathan binkert <n...@binkert.org> wrote: > By the way, I don't hate iterChildren(). I just agree with the python > guys who don't feel that the word iter is necessary. (In python3, > iteritems doesn't exist anymore, it's just called items). > > Nate > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 10:45 PM, nathan binkert <n...@binkert.org> wrote: >>> I tried unproxying without sorting and the regressions passed, so it looks >>> like you were right that it's unnecessary. I then got rid of >>> iterSortedChildren() and replaced the one remaining use with >>> for obj in sorted(root.iterChildren(), key=lambda o: o.path()): >>> obj.print_ini(ini_file) >>> I can upload a new diff if you want but it seemed like overkill. >>> >>> As far as the naming, I guess iterChildren has kind of grown on me; the >>> @property thing does seem like going overboard, but calling it >>> descendants() might not be too bad. How much benefit is there in having >>> 'iter' in there so you know it's an iterator? I'd be interested in having >>> people other than Nate weigh in on this, since while I consider his >>> opinions valuable, his perspective is not necessarily typical ;-). >> >> What so atypical about trying to find a very short, descriptive name? >> >> Nate >> > _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
