Gisle Aas wrote: > Instead of introducing a sorteddict I would instead suggest that the > future should bring an odict with a sort method; possibly also > keys_sorted and items_sorted methods. Instead of odict.sorted(), that can be spelled: sorted(odict) # sort the keys sorted(odict.values()) # sort the items sorted(odict.items()) # sort the (key, value) pairs More complex variations are also possible. The idea of a SortedDict is that it should be sorted at all times, without needing an explicit sort method, e.g.: D = SortedDict(d=1, a=1, b=1) print D => SortedDict(a=1, b=1, d=1) D['c'] = 1 print D => SortedDict(a=1, b=1, c=1, d=1) If you need to call a sort method on the dict to generate the sorted version, you might as well just pass the values you want to sorted(). That's more flexible, as you can sort whatever you want by anything you like. I only know one use-case for a SortedDict: doctests. It's hard to use dicts in doctests, because when you print the dict, the items appear in arbitrary order. If you had a SortedDict, you could always predict what the dict would look like and use it in a doctest. Possibly there are other use-cases, but if so I don't know what they are. -- Steven
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4