George Sakkis wrote:
> Fredrik Lundh wrote:
>
>> John Reese wrote:
>>
>> > It seems like it would be clear and mostly backwards compatible if the
>> > + operator on any iterables created a new iterable that iterated
>> > throught first its left operand and then its right, in the style of
>> > itertools.chain.
>>
>> you do know that "iterable" is an informal interface, right? to what
>> class would you add this operation?
>>
>> </F>
>
> The base object class would be one candidate, similarly to the way
> __nonzero__ is defined to use __len__, or __contains__ to use __iter__.
What has a better chance of success in my eyes is an extension to yield
all items from an iterable without using an explicit for loop: instead of
for item in iterable:
yield item
you could write
yield from iterable
or
yield *iterable
etc.
Georg
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
