Scott David Daniels: > I'd suggest some changes. It is nice to have Heaps with equal > contents equal no matter what order the inserts have been done. > Consider how you want Heap([1, 2, 3]) and Heap([3, 1, 2]) to behave. > Similarly, it is nice to have str and repr produce canonical > representations (I would skip the __str__ code, myself, though). > Also, subclasses should get their identities tweaked as so:
My version was a *raw* one, just an idea, this is a bit better: http://rafb.net/p/nLPPjo35.html I like your changes. In the beginning I didn't want to put __eq__ __ne__ methods at all, because they are too much slow, but being them O(n ln n) I think your solution is acceptable. Some methods may have a name different from the heap functions: def smallest(self): def push(self, item): def pop(self): def replace(self, item): Two things left I can see: I think the __init__ may have a boolean inplace parameter to avoid copying the given list, so this class is about as fast as the original heapify function (but maybe such thing is too much dirty for a Python stdlib): def __init__(self, sequence=None, inplace=False): if sequence is None: self._heap = [] elif isinstance(sequence, self.__class__): self._heap = sequence._heap[:] else: if inplace and isinstance(sequence, list): self._heap = sequence else: self._heap = list(sequence) heapify(self._heap) The second thing, I don't like much the __iter__ because it yields unsorted items: def __iter__(self): return self._heap.__iter__() Is this good? I think this can be accepted. Thank you, bye, bearophile -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
