There must be a better way

[Colin J. Williams]

On 22/04/2013 10:42 AM, Neil Cerutti wrote:
> On 2013-04-21, Colin J. Williams <cjw at ncf.ca> wrote:
>> On 20/04/2013 9:07 PM, Terry Jan Reedy wrote:
>>> On 4/20/2013 8:34 PM, Tim Chase wrote:
>>>> In 2.x, the csv.reader() class (and csv.DictReader() class) offered
>>>> a .next() method that is absent in 3.x
>>>
>>> In Py 3, .next was renamed to .__next__ for *all* iterators. The
>>> intention is that one iterate with for item in iterable or use builtin
>>> functions iter() and next().
>>>
>>>
>> Thanks to Chris, Tim and Terry for their helpful comments.
>>
>> I was seeking some code that would be acceptable to both Python 2.7 and 3.3.
>>
>> In the end, I used:
>>
>> inData= csv.reader(inFile)
>>
>> def main():
>>       if ver == '2':
>>           headerLine= inData.next()
>>       else:
>>           headerLine= inData.__next__()
>>       ...
>>       for item in inData:
>>           assert len(dataStore) == len(item)
>>           j= findCardinal(item[10])
>>           ...
>>
>> This is acceptable to both versions.
>>
>> It is not usual to have a name with preceding and following
>> udserscores,imn user code.
>>
>> Presumably, there is a rationale for the change from csv.reader.next
>> to csv.reader.__next__.
>>
>> If next is not acceptable for the version 3 csv.reader, perhaps __next__
>> could be added to the version 2 csv.reader, so that the same code can be
>> used in the two versions.
>>
>> This would avoid the kluge I used above.
>
> Would using csv.DictReader instead a csv.reader be an option?
>
Since I'm only interested in one or two columns, the simpler approach is 
probably better.

Colin W.