Alex Martelli wrote: > "Consuming" didn't really come into consideration for the > backwards compatibility part because only objects indexable with > integers, 0 and up (and raising IndexError at some point) were usable in > for statements in old Pythons, there was no "consuming".
Ah yes, of course. How quickly we forget: you couldn't say "for line in file...". No generators either. But there was still at least one object that was consumable: xreadlines. Still, I think using an xreadlines object is an unusual enough case that I'm not going to lose any sleep about it. Document it as a known issue and forget it *wink* [snip] > This kind of spaghetti code is what gives backwards compatibility its > bad name, of course. Be sure that you're getting paid for this in > proportion to its ugliness, and your finances should be set for life. Hah, I wish! Thanks for the assistance, I learnt a lot. Let's hope I don't have to use it ever again... -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
