>> >> I know that this is a very small change, but it can make gdbm objects >> look more like dictionaries. >> >> Please make comments. :-) >> >> > What you would need is a method to *create and return* a generator, and > it's the generator that should have the next() method. Otherwise you > can't have two independent iterations over the same gdbm object (and you > don't have a way of ensuring iteration starts at the beginning). > Yes, of course, you are right. I should have returned a newly created generator. Still I wonder why we do not have this? Would it be a good idea to make gdbm objects iterable by default?
Thanks, Laszlo -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
