docs on for-loop with no __iter__?
tjreedy at udel.edu
Wed Sep 8 06:23:31 CEST 2004
"Steven Bethard" <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote in message
news:loom.20040907T091810-178 at post.gmane.org...
> Ahh, yeah, I'm sorry, I didn't even realize that reading of "always" was
> possible. When I wrote "Same reasons Python always breaks old code" I
> intended the reading "For the only reasons that Python ever breaks old
> but I can see the other reading now... Yup, I'll take my half. =)
I believe I also misread the same way Alex did, but other meaning now
More information about the Python-list