On 2016-11-30 19:11, Chris Kaynor wrote:
All that said, I would not be opposed to Python including a random.reservoir_choice (probably not the best name) function *in addition* to random.choice. The algorithm has its uses, but enough drawbacks and gotchas that it likely is not a good candidate for a fallback.
I think this may be the path of least resistance for this. Even if this does imply one or two new functions in random, it may be better than changing random.choice.
If these functions would be used enough by enough end users to justify this change is debatable, however.
-- Bernardo Sulzbach http://www.mafagafogigante.org/ mafagafogiga...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
