[Dev] Proposing the removal of Item.__iter__( )

[Morgen Sagen]

A clarification:  classes like ItemCollection would still be free to 
implement __iter__; I'm just proposing doing away with the generic 
Item.__iter__.

On Oct 25, 2004, at 12:51 PM, Morgen Sagen wrote:

> This is an old outstanding issue I would like to resolve:
>
> One way to get an item's children was to iterate on the item ("for 
> child in item:"), but now that ItemCollection overrides __iter__( ), 
> that changes the behavior.  Iterating on an ItemCollection returns 
> results rather than children.
>
> Unless there are any objections, I would like to have Andi remove 
> Item's __iter__( ) method and just have people use iterChildren( ) 
> instead.