If the type hierarchy is implemented well, functions for `Dict` would
ideally be written to work with `super(Dict)` (i.e., `Associative`). And
in fact, some are--e.g., `in`, `haskey`, `show`, `keys`, `values`, etc.
See `base/dict.jl` for the implementation.
Now, it could be argued that the type
Hello all,
Apologies in advance if I’m missing something obvious. I’ve only just started
experimenting with some of the more advanced features of Julia’s types, and
I’ve hit a bit of a wall…
Say I wanted to replicate something like Python’s `collections.defaultdict` or
Ruby’s `Hash` class
On August 23, 2015 at 21:08:16, Kevin Squire (kevin.squ...@gmail.com) wrote:
If the type hierarchy is implemented well, functions for `Dict` would ideally
be written to work with `super(Dict)` (i.e., `Associative`). And in fact, some
are--e.g., `in`, `haskey`, `show`, `keys`, `values`, etc.
