classification
Title: Backport PEP 3114 (__next__)
Type: behavior Stage:
Components: Versions: Python 2.6
process
Status: closed Resolution: duplicate
Dependencies: Superseder:
Assigned To: Nosy List: benjamin.peterson, brett.cannon, rhettinger
Priority: critical Keywords: 26backport

Created on 2008-03-17 17:49 by brett.cannon, last changed 2008-07-31 01:53 by benjamin.peterson. This issue is now closed.

Messages (3)
msg63694 - (view) Author: Brett Cannon (brett.cannon) * (Python committer) Date: 2008-03-17 17:49
PEP 3114 needs to be backported. Most likely the best approach is to
backport the next() built-in but to have it call next() on the iterator
instead of __next__(). That should hopefully minimize breakage while
allowing for moving over to the new built-in.
msg63701 - (view) Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * (Python committer) Date: 2008-03-17 18:12
I don't think this should be backported.  It leaves Py2.6 with a
confused mess of protocols.  The 2-to-3 transformation is simple. 
Backporting doesn't add value.
msg70456 - (view) Author: Benjamin Peterson (benjamin.peterson) * (Python committer) Date: 2008-07-31 01:53
This has been done.
History
Date User Action Args
2008-07-31 01:53:08benjamin.petersonsetstatus: open -> closed
nosy: + benjamin.peterson
resolution: duplicate
messages: + msg70456
2008-03-17 20:11:37brett.cannonsetpriority: release blocker -> critical
2008-03-17 18:12:20rhettingersetnosy: + rhettinger
messages: + msg63701
2008-03-17 17:49:20brett.cannoncreate