On Sunday 20 April 2003 05:31 pm, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I have to think about this more. ATM I'm inclined to say that this is > relatively uncommon, and it's not that hard to come up with an > efficient implementation. Python's philosophy about data types is > that a few versatile data types (list, dict) get most the attention > because they are re-usable in so many places. When you get to other > algorithms, there is such a variety that it's hard to imagine putting > them all in the standard library; instead, it's easy to roll your own > built out of the standard ones. Aside from the efficiency improves, I like the self-documenting nature of using .enqueue and .dequeue methods instead of .append and .pop(0). But I see your point. > I know what this is, but I don't see the point. I don't know who you > are (don't think we've ever met) and I respond based on your words, > not on who wrote them. So what's the point? I just had my client setup to sign messages automatically; I'll disable it :) Jeremy
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