pavel-lexyr <pa...@lexyr.com> added the comment:
There is a core part of the `takedowhile` proposal's use case that I am having trouble envisioning via the alternative `before_and_after` proposal. If the `after` part of the iterator the user does not engage with, the transitional elements will be stuck indefinitely. What would a correct usage be, in case one wants the following two conditions to hold true: 1. the amount of elements after the first falsifying one is minimal, i.e. 0 2. all the yielded elements are processed no matter what? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue44571> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
