csv readers take iterables as well as iterators #2653
Conversation
|
@graingert, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @bitdancer, @berkerpeksag and @birkenfeld to be potential reviewers. |
|
Hello, and thanks for your contribution! I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept your contribution by verifying you have signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA). Unfortunately we couldn't find an account corresponding to your GitHub username on bugs.python.org (b.p.o) to verify you have signed the CLA (this might be simply due to a missing "GitHub Name" entry in your b.p.o account settings). This is necessary for legal reasons before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue. Thanks again to your contribution and we look forward to looking at it! |
| string each time its :meth:`!__next__` method is called --- :term:`file objects | ||
| *csvfile* can be any object which supports the :term:`iterable` protocol and returns an | ||
| iterator that returns a string each time its :term`iterator`'s :meth:`!__next__` method | ||
| is called when its :meth:`!__iter__` method is called --- :term:`file objects |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would suggest instead changing the original with the following minimal change:
...can be any iterable object whose iterator returns a string each time its...
|
I don't think this is completely trivial, so you should open an issue for it. |
| @@ -416,7 +417,7 @@ Reader objects have the following public attributes: | |||
|
|
|||
| .. attribute:: csvreader.line_num | |||
|
|
|||
| The number of lines read from the source iterator. This is not the same as the | |||
| The number of lines read from the source iterable. This is not the same as the | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why change this? If there is only one iterator involved, the original would be more precise.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good point, iterator is more correct here.
|
To try and help move older pull requests forward, we are going through and backfilling 'awaiting' labels on pull requests that are lacking the label. Based on the current reviews, the best we can tell in an automated fashion is that a core developer requested changes to be made to this pull request. If/when the requested changes have been made, please leave a comment that says, |
|
Sadly I am unable to honestly say that I have made the requested changes; please review again. |
|
Thanks for making the requested changes! @bitdancer: please review the changes made to this pull request. |
|
However it was requested that I make an 'issue' first |
|
Closing as the CLA has not been signed within the last month. |
No description provided.