Marco Buttu added the comment: I agree with you that the current sentence:
"We have seen that the for statement is such an iterator" is wrong. But also the new sentence IMHO is confusing, because it stills compare statementes with objects: "the for statement expects an object that is iterable. The function list is another; it creates lists from iterables". Also list is a class, not a function. IMHO the goal of the sentence you want to patch is to complete the previous one [1], adding an example of "construct" that operates with iterables, and of function that takes an iterable. If you want to follow that purpose, I suggest somethink like this: "We have seen that the for statement is such a construct, while examples of functions that take an iterable are ``sum()`` and ``max()``::" Written in better English than mine... [1] "We say such an object is iterable, that is, suitable as a target for functions and constructs that expect something from which they can obtain successive items until the supply is exhausted." ---------- nosy: +marco.buttu _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue29414> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
