[Paolino] > >>Well this happened after I tried instinctively > >>itertools.chain(child.method() for child in self).
As Jack's note points out, your proposed signature is incompatible with the one we have now. I recommend creating your own version: def paolino_chain(iterables): for it in iterables: for element in it: yield element >>> list(chain(c+c for c in string.ascii_uppercase)) ['A', 'A', 'B', 'B', 'C', 'C', 'D', 'D', 'E', 'E', 'F', 'F', 'G', 'G', 'H', 'H', 'I', 'I', 'J', 'J', 'K', 'K', 'L', 'L', 'M', 'M', 'N', 'N', 'O', 'O', 'P', 'P', 'Q', 'Q', 'R', 'R', 'S', 'S', 'T', 'T', 'U', 'U', 'V', 'V', 'W', 'W', 'X', 'X', 'Y', 'Y', 'Z', 'Z'] > >>Is there a reason for this signature ? It was handy for the use cases I had in mind when creating the function. Also it was styled after a version in another language where it had proven successful. > > This is more suited to comp.lang.python > > > Why ? I'm not asking for help ,I'm asking why itertools library is > implemented like that and if it is possible to clean it. The newsgroup would have guided you to the solution listed above. If you want to request a new feature, please use SourceForge. Raymond _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com