Status of PEP's?

[Greg Ewing]

Fernando Pérez wrote:
> 
> Let me try to organize my thoughts a bit on why I dislike this PEP so
> seriously. I have no problem with the "everything is a first-class object"
> philosophy in Python. But I feel that precisely what this pep introduces is a
> bad usage (IMO) of these ideas.

I'd also like to add this:

It's been suggested that this proposal doesn't ask us to
think of integers as being sequences, only as having
sequences implicitly associated with them.

But I don't agree. While it's certainly possible to
give any object an __iter__ method that does anything
you want, it doesn't mean you should!

To me, the __iter__ protocol is intended to be used when 
an object can reasonably be thought of as a sequence. 
That's actually *being* a sequence, not just "associated" 
with a sequence in some way.

Using the __iter__ protocol in the way suggested by
this PEP is abusing it, in my opinion.

-- 
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, University of Canterbury,	  
Christchurch, New Zealand
To get my email address, please visit my web page:	  
http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~greg