On Dec 1, 8:17 pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote: > In article > <85100df7-a8b0-47e9-a854-ba8a8a2f3...@r31g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>, > Joshua Bronson <jabron...@gmail.com> wrote: > >I noticed the phonebook example in your ActiveState recipe and thought > >you might consider changing it to something like husbands to wives, > >since the names-to-phone-numbers relation is many-to-many. > > What makes you think husbands to wives is one-to-one? ;-) (Even > assuming monogamy, you have husbands-to-husbands and wives-to-wives.)
Hah! I knew this was coming and even put "assuming monogamy" in the source! http://bitbucket.org/jab/bidict/src/712da6e2dd26/bidict.py#cl-65 ;P As for husbands-to-husbands and wives-to-wives, those are just separate one-to-one mappings! Doesn't mean husbands-to-wives ain't one- to-one! At any rate, apologies to the community for my heteronormative example. It was merely pedagogical and reflects nothing about my personal views! If you have any further concerns, please send them to my lawyer, /dev/null. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
