On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Mike Klaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...and the majority of these cases would work fine with views (input > to sorted(), etc).
Suppose "the majority" here means 36 of the 46 cases. Then what you're saying is, if I write .items() without thinking, there's about a 3% chance it won't work (10 out of 339 cases). Forgive me: the fact that you've gotten it down to 3%, e.g. by making items() return a view instead of an iterator, doesn't make me terrifically happy. I'm OK with the status quo. Maybe iteritems() is a wart, but I think views will be a much worse wart! If the only hard requirement is that dict lose *something* in Python 3.0, I suggest droping values() and itervalues(), as I never use them. ;-) -j _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
