On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 03:45:03PM -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote: > At 09:34 AM 3/4/2006 -0800, Anna Ravenscroft wrote: > >I think this is a really good point. next() is supposed to get used, by > >coders, in regular code - so it shouldn't be __next__. I can understand > >the desire for both forms, although that seems it would clutter things up > >unnecessarily - particularly if the two do the same thing. > > By this argument, we should be using ob.len() instead of len(ob), and > ob.iter() instead of iter(ob).
Yes, I think it'd be more consistent and more object-oriented. After all we've switched from string.split(x, y) to x.split(y)... Oleg. -- Oleg Broytmann http://phd.pp.ru/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN. _______________________________________________ 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