[Python-3000] PEP: rename it.next() to it.__next__(), add a next() built-in

[Greg Ewing]

Josiah Carlson wrote:

> It's already spelled...
> 
>     for item in iter:
>         #code for when we got something
>         break
>     else:
>         #code for when we didn't get anything

Technically this is true, but I can't help feeling
that's a terribly obscure way to use a for-loop.
Normally 'for' means you're iterating over the
whole sequence, or at least potentially more than
one item from it. A different keyword at the
beginning would make it much clearer that you
only want one item.

BTW, I would really have liked to make it

   with item from iter:
     ...
   else:
     ...

but I fear that would be impossibly confusing
given what we've already used 'with' for. :-(

--
Greg