Gustavo Narea <me at gustavonarea.net> writes: > I've been searching for a data structure like a tuple/list *but* > unordered -- like a set, but duplicated elements shouldn't be removed. By that description, you're looking for the “Bag” pattern. […] > A multiset is not exactly what I need: I still need to use the > elements in the order they were given. This appears to contradict your explicit request that the collection type be unordered. […] > To sum up, it would behave like a tuple or a list, except when it's > compared with another object: They would be equivalent if they're both > unordered tuples/lists, and have the same elements. There can be > mutable and immutable editions (UnorderedList and UnorderedTuple, > respectively). Okay, so you want something rather special; it would be misleading to call this an unordered type, since you *do* want ordering preserved. It's only the comparison operators that would ignore ordering. AFAIK you'll need to design and implement this yourself. > I will write a PEP to elaborate on this if you think it'd be nice to > have. Or, should I have written the PEP first? Either way; but I think this discussion belongs on ‘python-ideas’ while the behaviour is still being designed. -- \ “On the internet you simply can't outsource parenting.” —Eliza | `\ Cussen, _Top 10 Internet Filter Lies_, The Punch, 2010-03-25 | _o__) | Ben Finney
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