On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 4:39 AM Christopher Barker <python...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 2:12 AM Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > >> Since most iterators don't have many methods, it's not clear to me that >> iterators are even a little bit relevant. > > > I think you just answered your own question. > > Since iterators in general don’t have methods, they can not be chained. I > believe the OP was suggesting that they have some methods so that they could > be chained.
They cannot be chained using method lookups. One of the proposals is to have a different form of chaining, which passes the preceding object as a first parameter. > There are two tricks here: > > 1) What methods to add? There are literally an infinite number of > possibilities. > > 2) there are multiple ways to create Iterators, how does one make these > methods universal? > Both can be solved if the construct gets syntactic support rather than type support. For instance, if this: 1 |> add(2) is exactly equivalent to this: add(1, 2) then neither the iterator nor the consumer needs to be aware of the new protocol. I don't like that syntax though, and this will live or die on a good syntax. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/YUYZWQXUR5KXSSSNXJ4OL777UPDC6WE5/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
