Claudiu.Popa added the comment: > I already thought of that, but that doesn't work: the iterator version > would return the stack in the wrong order (note the .reverse() call in the > code).
Then, couldn't this: stack = list(_extract_stack_iter(_get_stack(f), limit=limit)) stack.reverse() return stack be rewritten as this, knowing the fact that _extract_stack_iter returns an iterable? return reversed(_extract_stack_iter(_get_stack(f), limit=limit)) And in this case, extract_stack_ex could become extract_stack_iter or something like that. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue19146> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com