On Nov 7, 2017, at 07:12, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote: > The problem is this is taking things to a level of precision that makes > the guarantee tedious to remember and reason about. > > The only thing that's friendly to (non-expert) users is either "dicts > are always ordered [by insertion order], point bar" or "dicts are not > ordered, point bar". Anything in-between, with reservations depending > on which operations are invoked and when, is not really helpful to the > average (non-expert) user. > > Which is why I think the user-friendliness argument does not apply if > order ceases to be guaranteed after __del__ is called. That’s a very important point. If it’s difficult to explain, teach, and retain the different ordering guarantees between built-in dict and OrderedDict, it might in fact be better to not guarantee any ordering for built-in dict *in the language specification*. Otherwise we might need a section as big as chapter 5 in the Python Language Reference just to dict ordering semantics. ;) Cheers, -Barry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20171107/d68aecbf/attachment.sig>
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