RetroSearch Browse

Mon Apr 21 22:02:47 CEST 2014 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-April/134235.html

Hi Guys,
please don't do it!
We don't need this legacy really.

On 21 April 2014 08:41, Armin Rigo <arigo at tunes.org> wrote:

> Hi Nick,
>
> On 21 April 2014 07:39, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Notably, I recommend that hybrid code avoid calling mapping iteration
> > methods directly, and instead rely on builtin functions where possible,
> > and some additional helper functions for cases that would be a simple
> > combination of a builtin and a mapping method in pure Python 3 code, but
> > need to be handled slightly differently to get the exact same semantics
> in
> > Python 2.
>
> How about explicitly noting that in Python 2, a large fraction of
> usages of the iterkeys(), itervalues() and iteritems() methods (that's
> more than 99% in my experience, but I might be biased) should just be
> written as keys(), values() and items() in the first place, with no
> measurable difference of performance or memory usage?  I would
> recommend to anyone with a large Python 2 code base to simply do a
> textual search-and-replace and see if any test breaks.  If not,
> problem solved.
>
>
Couldn't agree more with Armin.

-- 
http://lucasbardella.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20140421/83dea6fe/attachment.html>

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-April/134235.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 469: Restoring the iterkeys/values/items() methods