FAQ

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:35:24 +1000, "Delaney, Timothy C (Timothy)" wrote:


"iterable" *is* <some type spec>. If something is "iterable" it has a well-defined interface - specifically:
I get what you mean, but let me point out that "iterable" does not appear
in the index of either the Language Reference or Library Reference, nor do
I see it in the introduction. Actually, the introduction would really
benefit from a description of all the conventions used in the manual. As
it stands, one has to come across this usage several times to realize it's
a convention (and that's not the way many people use reference manuals).

What would be really cool, and probably easy, is to just make sure that
every occurrence of "iterable" is a link to a page that describes that
well-defined interface.

This is still beyond the scope of the question about the Set documentation.
I appreciate the responses, but I'm not sure whether this is the right time
to continue this sort of discussion.

Gary

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase