On 22 Nov 2005 03:07:47 -0800, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Bengt Richter wrote: >> Ok, so if not in the standard library, what is the problem? Can't find what >> you want with google and PyPI etc.? Or haven't really settled on what your >> _requirements_ are? That seems to be the primary problem people who complain >> with "why no sprollificator mode?" questions. They don't know what they >> really >> mean when it comes down to a DYFR (Define Your Felicitous Requirements) >> challenge. >> So DYFR ;-) >Beat me. I am not the one asking the question. Sorry, I thought you wanted an ordered dict too. > >> >> > parsing or not parsing is not the point, and parsing/converting is >> >> > still "create a new view" of an existing data structure. >> >> >> So you'd like the mechanics to be automated and hidden? Then you need to >> DYFR for using the black box you want. Methods, semantics. >Lose you. don't know what you want to say. > I like solving problems. I just get frustrated when people don't focus on getting the problem defined, which IME is 2/3 of the way to a solution. I don't mind, in fact enjoy, rambling musings, but if someone seems actually to want a solution for something, I like to try to realize it concretely. After finally reading that the odict.py in PyPI by Larosa/Foord was what was desired, but slower in use than what Fredrik posted, I decided to see if I could speed up odict.py. I now have a version that I think may be generally faster. I still don't know whether it will be of any user w.r.t. the requirements of anyone on the bandwagon of asking for some kind of ordered dict, but we'll see what we'll see ;-) Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
