On 2015-05-01 3:19 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
Sure, but the difference is that one would have called __aiter__() first
>and the other __iter__(). Normally, either of the two would not exist, so
>using the wrong loop on an object will just fail. However, after we passed
>that barrier, we already know that the object that was returned is supposed
>to obey to the expected protocol, so it doesn't matter whether we call
>__next__() or name it __anext__(), except that the second requires us to
>duplicate an existing protocol.
If we must have __aiter__, then we may as well also have __anext__; besides
being more consistent, it also allows an object to be both a normol iterator
and an asynch iterator.
And this is a good point too.
Thanks,
Yury
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
