On 22 Nov 2005 19:15:42 -0800, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Alex Martelli wrote: >> However, since Christoph himself just misclassified C++'s std::map as >> "ordered" (it would be "sorted" in this new terminology he's now >> introducing), it seems obvious that the terminological confusion is >> rife. Many requests and offers in the past for "ordered dictionaries" >> (e.g. on this group) were also "sorted", NOT "ordered", in this new >> terminology. >> >> Maybe it would therefore be clearer to have the name of the new >> container reflect this, with a specific mention of *insertion* order... >> rather than just call it "ordered" and risk probable confusion. >Um, > >what would be the definition of "sorted" and "ordered", before we can >go on ? > For me the implication of "sorted" is that there is a sorting algorithm that can be used to create an ordering from a prior state of order, whereas "ordered" could be the result of arbitrary permutation, e.g., manual shuffling, etc. Of course either way, a result can be said to have a particular defined order, but "sorted" gets ordered by sorting, and "ordered" _may_ get its order by any means. Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
