Since .next() seems to be equivalent to .send(None), why wasn't .next() just given an optional parameter which defaults to None?
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Andrey Fedorov <email@example.com> wrote:They are equivalent AFAIK.
> As far as I can tell, a generator's .next() is equivalent to .send(None). Is
> this true?
> If so, [why] aren't they unified in a method with a single argument which defaults
> to None?
> - Andrey
next() predates send().