Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> I don't favor one over the other. Am just pointing-out that the
> proposal is a little more complex than simply wishing for an ordered
> verion of a dictionary and expecting that that wish is self-defining in
> a way the matches everyone's intuition, use cases, and expectations.
If you have an odict with first-insertion ordering, it's fairly trivial
to convert it to a dictionary with last-insertion ordering:
class odictlastinsertion(odict):
def __setitem__(self, k, v):
self.pop(k, None)
self[k] = v
As you note, going the other way would be rather difficult, suggesting
that the version ordered by the first key insertion is the more
fundamental structure.
A PEP would definitely be needed to thrash out those kind of issues and
decisions though
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
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