Bengt Richter wrote: > On 22 Nov 2005 03:07:47 -0800, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >Bengt Richter wrote: > >> Ok, so if not in the standard library, what is the problem? Can't find what > >> you want with google and PyPI etc.? Or haven't really settled on what your > >> _requirements_ are? That seems to be the primary problem people who > >> complain > >> with "why no sprollificator mode?" questions. They don't know what they > >> really > >> mean when it comes down to a DYFR (Define Your Felicitous Requirements) > >> challenge. > >> So DYFR ;-) > >Beat me. I am not the one asking the question. > Sorry, I thought you wanted an ordered dict too. I want/need(well I am told I don't need) to loop over a dict in certain order but I don't want or need a standard one as I don't think there is ONE implementation of it. My original post was a response to the question "why do one want ordered dict", in the tone of "there is no way one wants it".
> > > > >> >> > parsing or not parsing is not the point, and parsing/converting is > >> >> > still "create a new view" of an existing data structure. > >> >> > >> So you'd like the mechanics to be automated and hidden? Then you need to > >> DYFR for using the black box you want. Methods, semantics. > >Lose you. don't know what you want to say. > > > I like solving problems. I just get frustrated when people don't focus on > getting > the problem defined, which IME is 2/3 of the way to a solution. I don't mind, > in fact enjoy, rambling musings, but if someone seems actually to want a > solution > for something, I like to try to realize it concretely. I tried to define the problem, and how I solve it(if it helps to convey the message), but was told you don't have the problem in the first place. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
