Message140961
| Author |
orsenthil |
| Recipients |
eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, haggholm, orsenthil, r.david.murray |
| Date |
2011年07月23日.10:19:54 |
| SpamBayes Score |
1.5659109e-05 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<20110723101939.GA2464@mathmagic> |
| In-reply-to |
<1311413847.73.0.341656012806.issue12581@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 09:37:27AM +0000, Éric Araujo wrote:
> I’ve had a look at the docstring and the reST docs, and they clearly
> say that sequences are supported, not arbitrary iterables.
Yeah. At the first cut, when I saw the suggestion of iter(), I thought
it was better, but looking at it again, we just need to test the
sequence-ness. I would leave it as such with len() unless we come up
with a case that it does not test the sequenceness completely.
As Eric points out, changing it to iter may cause some side-effects
(of exhaustion of the container) |
|