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

[Brett Cannon]

On 3/7/07, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> Ka-Ping Yee schrieb:
> > On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Georg Brandl wrote:
> >> Ka-Ping Yee schrieb:
> >> > On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >> >> Having now read this entire thread I am going to accept Ping's PEP.
> >> >> Adding the sentinel argument to the next() builtin was what did it for
> >> >> me: it neatly solves the problem if having to catch that StopIteration
> >> >> in 99% of the cases.
> >> >
> >> > Okay, this is checked in as PEP 3114.
> >>
> >> Patch is at http://python.org/sf/1675363.
> >
> > Thanks for doing this work!
>
> I hope it helps getting a decision about the PEP.
>
> One thing that struck me while doing the next -> __next__ transition
> was the new asymmetry between generator methods; there is now send()
> and close(), but no next() anymore.
>

Oooh, that's a good point.  I guess that would mean generators should
keep their 'next' methods for API symmetry with 'send' and 'close';
calling next() just for when you are not sending something in would be
icky.

But of course having two methods that do the exact same thing seems a
little icky as well.  I was on the fence with this whole proposal, but
this makes me -0 on the rename and +0 on the new built-in.

-Brett