How do you refer to an iterator in docs?

[Jean-Michel Pichavant]

Jon Clements wrote:
> On Thursday, 19 April 2012 13:21:20 UTC+1, Roy Smith  wrote:
>   
>> Let's say I have a function which takes a list of words.  I might write 
>> the docstring for it something like:
>>
>> def foo(words):
>>    "Foo-ify words (which must be a list)"
>>
>> What if I want words to be the more general case of something you can 
>> iterate over?  How do people talk about that in docstrings?  Do you say 
>> "something which can be iterated over to yield words", "an iterable over 
>> words", or what?
>>
>> I can think of lots of ways to describe the concept, but most of them 
>> seem rather verbose and awkward compared to "a list of words", "a 
>> dictionary whose keys are words", etc.
>>     
>
> I would just write the function signature as (very similar to how itertools does it):
>
> def func(iterable, ..):
>   pass
>
> IMHO that documents itself.
>
> If you need explicit, look at the itertools documentation.
>
> hth
>
> Jon.
>
>   
I think arguments should be named after their content/purpose instead of 
their type/nature.
For documenation, argument should mention their type, 'iterable' is a 
valid choice.

in other words:

def func(words):
    """func-ify the given iterable of words"

would be better than

def func(iterable):
    """func-ify the given iterable of words"


JM

PS : my point stands valid for the itertools module, as within this 
module, an argument purpose could be to be iterable withtout any regard 
for the content.