Erik Max Francis wrote:
Roman Suzi wrote:

I think that if any object (from standard library at least) doesn't support
iteration, it should clearly state so.


My guess is that 'for' causes the use of 'm[0]', which is (rightfully) an error...

Can this behaviour of email be considered a bug?
Is there a good case to iterate over something useful in a message

Why would it be a bug if the documentation never stated that the object was iterable?

I think the bug is not that an error is produced, but that the _wrong_ error is produced. Trying to iterate over something that is not iterable should produce a TypeError saying so (not an Attribute error):


py> class C(object):
...     pass
...
py> iter(C())
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<interactive input>", line 1, in ?
TypeError: iteration over non-sequence

I've actually seen something like this come up before (I think with email.Message even...) I say call it a bug and submit a patch. It's pretty easy to fix -- just add an __iter__ method to Message that raises a TypeError. That makes it clear that Message doesn't intend to support the getitem protocol -- it just does so accidentally because it provides __getitem__.

STeVe
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Reply via email to