RetroSearch Browse

Sun Jun 15 07:34:45 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-June/080408.html

Guido van Rossum <guido <at> python.org> writes:

> 
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 4:57 PM, André Malo <nd <at> perlig.de> wrote:
> > I find this collection of cases pretty weak as an argument for implementing
> > that in the stdlib. A lot of special purpose types would fit into such
> > reasoning, but do you want to have all of them maintained here?
> 
> No, but an ordered dict happens to be a *very* common thing to need,
> for a variety of reasons. So I'm +0.5 on adding this to the
> collections module. However someone needs to contribute working code.
> It would also be useful to verify that it actually fulfills the needs
> of some actual use case. Perhaps looking at how Django uses its
> version would be helpful.

I compared multiple ordered dicts now (including Babel, Django and the
C-implementation I mentioned earlier) and implemented a python version
of the ordered dict as reference implementation:

   http://dev.pocoo.org/hg/sandbox/raw-file/tip/odict.py

Regards,
Armin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-June/080408.html below:

[Python-Dev] Proposal: add odict to collections