zip.shortest(...) # same as zip(...)
I presume that zip() would keep its current behavior, yes?
I kind of like this -- is there any precedent for it in the standard library?
The PEP seems to reject this saying:
The actual zip type is an undocumented implementation detail. Adding additional methods or constructors is really a much larger change that is not necessary to achieve the stated goal.
well, yes and no -- the first part indicates that we could totally change the type of the zip, as long as it's a collable that returns an iterator.
Whether adding additional methods is too large a change -- that's totally a matter of opinion.
> Having these alternative 'methods' would be similar to having different functions in itertools,
indeed -- same idea, different namepace.