gdbm objects not iterable?
gandalf at shopzeus.com
Wed Oct 3 16:40:14 CEST 2007
>> I know that this is a very small change, but it can make gdbm objects
>> look more like dictionaries.
>> Please make comments. :-)
> What you would need is a method to *create and return* a generator, and
> it's the generator that should have the next() method. Otherwise you
> can't have two independent iterations over the same gdbm object (and you
> don't have a way of ensuring iteration starts at the beginning).
Yes, of course, you are right. I should have returned a newly created
generator. Still I wonder why we do not have this? Would it be a good
idea to make gdbm objects iterable by default?
More information about the Python-list