New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-11-28 Thread Fuzzyman
Sorry for this hurried message - I've done a new implementation of out ordered dict. This comes out of the discussion on this newsgroup (see blog entry for link to archive of discussion). See the latest blog entry to get at it : http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/weblog/index.shtml Criticism soli

Re: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-11-28 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Fuzzyman wrote: > Criticism solicited (honestly) :-) A couple of minor points: - I would drop 2.2 compatibility - self=self isn't needed in the functions, because of nested scopes - popitem(self) can be rewritten as def popitem(self): try: key = self._sequence.pop()

RE: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-11-28 Thread Delaney, Timothy (Tim)
"Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > A couple of minor points: > - I would drop 2.2 compatibility Unfortunately, there are a *lot* of systems out there where only 2.2 is support (Red Hat 3.0 anyone?). I know we'd like to be able to not support earlier versions (yes, I saw today's messages on the djgpp p

Re: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-11-28 Thread Christoph Zwerschke
Fuzzyman wrote: > Sorry for this hurried message - I've done a new implementation of out > ordered dict. This comes out of the discussion on this newsgroup (see > blog entry for link to archive of discussion). Thanks. I'll try to check it out and put my oar in over the next weekend. One thing I a

Re: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-11-29 Thread Fuzzyman
Martin v. Löwis wrote: > Fuzzyman wrote: > > Criticism solicited (honestly) :-) > > A couple of minor points: > - I would drop 2.2 compatibility There are a lot of cheap hosting accounts where Python 2.2 is all that is available. I would only drop support if there is some *compelling* reason to d

Re: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-11-29 Thread Fuzzyman
Christoph Zwerschke wrote: > Fuzzyman wrote: > > Sorry for this hurried message - I've done a new implementation of out > > ordered dict. This comes out of the discussion on this newsgroup (see > > blog entry for link to archive of discussion). > > Thanks. I'll try to check it out and put my oar i

Re: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-11-29 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Fuzzyman wrote: >>- One problem with the FancyDict is that it allows >> d.keys.append(100) > > > Are you sure ? Not at all. This was from inspection only; I propably misinterpreted the code. Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-12-01 Thread Fuzzyman
Fuzzyman wrote: > Sorry for this hurried message - I've done a new implementation of out > ordered dict. This comes out of the discussion on this newsgroup (see > blog entry for link to archive of discussion). > > See the latest blog entry to get at it : > http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/weblog

Re: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-12-01 Thread Bengt Richter
On 1 Dec 2005 03:38:37 -0800, "Fuzzyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Fuzzyman wrote: >> Sorry for this hurried message - I've done a new implementation of out >> ordered dict. This comes out of the discussion on this newsgroup (see >> blog entry for link to archive of discussion). >> >> See the

Re: New Ordered Dictionery to Criticise

2005-12-02 Thread Fuzzyman
Hello Bengt, Bengt Richter wrote: > On 1 Dec 2005 03:38:37 -0800, "Fuzzyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >Fuzzyman wrote: > >> Sorry for this hurried message - I've done a new implementation of out > >> ordered dict. This comes out of the discussion on this newsgroup (see > >> blog entry fo