Devin Jeanpierre writes:
I've never assumed that (obviously, I guess), and that isn't stated in the docs. If that's the level of support of those recipes, this should be made clear inside the itertools documentation,
It already is clear. The very name "recipe" indicates that it may not be to everyone's taste, that it's not carefully designed to handle corner cases, and that people should review the code for their own use. The (very sparse) documentation associated with the recipes, which is clearly oriented to advising you how you can (a) produce similar code for different functions yourself and (b) make it better further emphasizes what the name indicates. Of course, all that may not be obvious to non-native speakers, but that's a completely different issue from the starting point of this thread, which was that these recipes belong in the stdlib rather than in its documentation. I have nothing to add to Terry's post explaining why that is not appropriate for these recipes "as is."
because they _are_ used in peoples' code.
Of course they are. That's what they're there for.