Alex Martelli wrote:
Next(s) would seem good...
That does not work. It has to be next(iter(s)), and that has been tried and eliminated because it is significantly slower.
Interesting. It depends a bit on the speed of tuple unpacking, but presumably that is quite fast. On my system it is pretty darn good:
0.101us "for x in s: break" 0.112us "x, = s"