[Tim] > > format % MultiDict(d1, d2, ...) > > > > ? That's exactly the same as the tuple idea, except there's a nice > > descriptive word in the middle of it <wink>. Nice. [Jack] > I've always wonderer why dict+dict isn't supported (or possibly > dict|dict, if the key-collision semantics of + on dict are seen as a > problem). Is there a good reason for this, or is it just that there > are other more important things to implement? The reason is that + (or |) looks symmetrical, but for the key collisions, one of them has to lose. We now have dict1.update(dict2), which is a bit more cumbersome, but makes it much clearer who is the loser. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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