Raymond Hettinger <rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
FWIW, I'm -1 on the proposal because it partially overlaps the existing capability of dict.update(). To the extent it doesn't overlap, it is use case challenged (typically, it doesn't make sense to build a brand-new dictionary from two independent dictionaries and the atypical case easily fulfilled by a couple of updates on an empty dict). Also, the notation itself is at odds with the existing pipe-operator used by sets and by dict views. FWIW, there are other alternatives to directly combining dictionaries. See http://code.activestate.com/recipes/305268/ for one example. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue6410> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
