Peek inside iterator (is there a PEP about this?)
Aaron "Castironpi" Brady
castironpi at gmail.com
Wed Oct 1 21:04:58 CEST 2008
On Oct 1, 9:46 am, Luis Zarrabeitia <ky... at uh.cu> wrote:
> Hi there.
> For most use cases I think about, the iterator protocol is more than enough.
> However, on a few cases, I've needed some ugly hacks.
> Ex 1:
> a = iter([1,2,3,4,5]) # assume you got the iterator from a function and
> b = iter([1,2,3]) # these two are just examples.
> has a different side effect from
> After the excecution, in the first case, iterator a contains just , on the
> second, it contains [4,5]. I think the second one is correct (the 5 was never
> used, after all). I tried to implement my 'own' zip, but there is no way to
> know the length of the iterator (obviously), and there is also no way
> to 'rewind' a value after calling 'next'.
> Ex 2:
> Will this iterator yield any value? Like with most iterables, a construct
> if iterator:
> # do something
> would be a very convenient thing to have, instead of wrapping a 'next' call on
> a try...except and consuming the first item.
> Ex 3:
> if any(iterator):
> # do something ... but the first true value was already consumed and
> # cannot be reused. "Any" cannot peek inside the iterator without
> # consuming the value.
> i1, i2 = tee(iterator)
> if any(i1):
> # do something with i2
> Has there been any PEP regarding the problem of 'peeking' inside an iterator?
> Knowing if the iteration will end or not, and/or accessing the next value,
> without consuming it? Is there any (simple, elegant) way around it?
> Luis Zarrabeitia (aka Kyrie)
> Fac. de Matemática y Computación, UH.http://profesores.matcom.uh.cu/~kyrie
It wouldn't be that hard to make your own.
a = peekingiter([1,2,3,4,5])
b = peekingiter([1,2,3])
Just don't cross it with typing and get peking duck.
More information about the Python-list