On 2017-07-20 11:30, Paul Moore wrote: > On 20 July 2017 at 10:15, Clément Pit-Claudel <cpitclau...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 2017-07-20 11:02, Paul Moore wrote: >>>> Also, what's the advantage of (x=1, y=2) over ntuple(x=1, y=2)? I.e., >>>> why does this need to be syntax instead of a library? >>> >>> Agreed. Now that keyword argument dictionaries retain their order, >>> there's no need for new syntax here. In fact, that's one of the key >>> motivating reasons for the feature. >> >> Isn't there a speed aspect? That is, doesn't the library approach require >> creating (and likely discarding) a dictionary every time a new ntuple is >> created? The syntax approach wouldn't need to do that. > > I don't think anyone has suggested that the instance creation time > penalty for namedtuple is the issue (it's the initial creation of the > class that affects interpreter startup time), so it's not clear that > we need to optimise that (at this stage)
Indeed, it's not clear we do. I was just offering a response to the original question, "what's the advantage of (x=1, y=2) over ntuple(x=1, y=2)?". _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
