On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 02:20:33PM -0700, Steven Bethard wrote: > Michele Simionato wrote: > >I am surprised nobody suggested we put those two methods into a > >separate module (say dictutils or even UserDict) as functions: > > > >from dictutils import tally, listappend > > > >tally(mydict, key) > >listappend(mydict, key, value) > > Sorry to join the discussion so late (I've been away from my email for a > week) but this was exactly my reaction too. In fact, I have a > 'dicttools' module with similar methods in it: <snipped>
I like this approach, it will give us a chance to test & tweak the signature before hanging it off dict proper. It feels similar to the strings module to str transition, sets module to set builtin, and itertools module to iter transition. itertools to iter transition, huh? I slipped that one in, I mentioned it to Raymond at PyCon and he didn't flinch. It would be nice not to have to sprinkle 'import itertools as it' in code. iter could also become a type wrapper instead of a function, so an iter instance could be a wrapper that figures out whether to call .next or __getitem__ depending on it's argument. for item in iter(mylist).imap: print item or for item in iter.imap(mylist): print item I haven't digested that too much, just a thought. -jackdied -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
