On Nov 5, 1:05 pm, Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > > Currently, there are no promises or guarantees about the final state > > of the iterator. > > I interpret the current doc statement as a promise that becomes > ambiguous when step > 1.
You may have missed my point. I wrote the tools, the docs, and the tests. If you interpret a "promise" in text, I can assure you it was not intended. The behavior *is* undefined because I never defined it. I'm happy to clarify the docs to make that explicit. Or I can alter the implementation a bit to make a guarantee if it looks like there is a good reason to do so. The OP doesn't have any use cases to light the way and I don't yet see any useful invariants that would arise out of either definition. And since the ambiguity only shows-up in a somewhat rare case, I'm inclined to just mark it as undefined. Raymond -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
