Compact OrderedDicts can leave gaps, and once in a while compactify. For example, whenever the entry table is full, it can decide whether to resize (and only copy non-gaps), or just compactactify
Compact regular dicts can swap from the back and have no gaps. I don't see the point of discussing these details. Isn't it enough to say that these are solvable problems, which we can worry about if/when someone actually decides to sit down and implement compact dicts? P.S.: Sorry about the repeated emails. I think it was the iOS Gmail app. On Jun 13, 2016 10:23 PM, "Ethan Furman" <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > > On 06/13/2016 05:47 PM, Larry Hastings wrote: >> >> On 06/13/2016 05:05 PM, MRAB wrote: > > >>> This could be avoided by expanding the items to include the index of >>> the 'previous' and 'next' item, so that they could be handled like a >>> doubly-linked list. >>> >>> The disadvantage would be that it would use more memory. >> >> >> Another, easier technique: don't fill holes. Same disadvantage >> (increased memory use), but easier to write and maintain. > > > I hope this is just an academic discussion: suddenly having Python's dicts grow continuously is going to have nasty consequences somewhere. > > -- > ~Ethan~
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
