[Python-ideas] __iter__ implies __contains__?
greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz
Mon Oct 3 07:20:15 CEST 2011
Terry Reedy wrote:
> I had the same reaction as Guido. Iteration is the *only* generic way to
> tell if an item is in a sequence or other collection.
I think the root cause of this problem is our rather cavalier
attitude to the distinction between iterables and iterators.
They're really quite different things, but we started out with
the notion that "for x in stuff" should be equally applicable
to both, and hence decided to give every iterator an __iter__
method that returns itself. By doing that, we made it
impossible for any generic protocol function to reliably tell
If I were designing the iterator protocol over again, I think
I would start by recognising that starting a new iteration
and continuing with an existing one are very different
operations, and that you almost always intend the former
rather than the latter. So I would declare that
"for x in stuff" always implies a *new* iteration, and
devise another syntax for continuing an existing one,
such as "for x from stuff". I would define iterables and
iterators as disjoint categories of object, and give __iter__
methods only to iterables, not iterators.
However, at least until Py4k comes around, we're stuck with
the present situation, which seems to include accepting that
"x in y" will occasionally gobble an iterator that you were
saving for later.
More information about the Python-ideas