PEP 234 little bug?

[Michael 'Mickey' Lauer]

Hans Nowak <wurmy at earthlink.net> wrote:
[...]
> Hm, I don't think so. I think it does not say that the *file*
> object should have a next() method... rather, it says that
> it's its own iterator, and the iterator has the next()
> method. Maybe the wording could have been a bit more careful,
> but essentially it's true what is says. And iterating over
> files has indeed been implemented in 2.2.

Yes, I was aware of that - I just thought the line
"is implemented" would mean the inclusion of the
(proposed) fileobject.next() method [which as a matter
of fact is _not_ implemented], not the iterator
itself.

Thanks for your response.

Later,

Mickey.