Christian Tismer wrote: > Just to add a word that I forgot: > > Adhering to the subject line, the intent is to track modifications > of a dict. > By definition, modification of a member of a dict without replacing > the value is not considered a dict change. > Well, I agree. But I suppose much depends on exactly what the OP meant by "... add a new element or alter an existing one". The post did follow that with "(the values in the dict are mutable)", which is presumably why garabik-2500 proposed catching __getitem__ as well as __setitem__.
I merely wanted to point out (not to you!) that there was no effective way to capture a change to a mutable item without, as you say, modifying the element classes. > I'd stick with the shallow approach. > Asking to track mutation of an element in the general case > is causing much trouble. > Support for element tracking can probably provided by overriding > the dict's getattr and recording the element in some extra > candidate list. > If the element itself is modified, it then could be looked up > as a member of that dict, given that the element's setattr > is traced, too. > regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC www.holdenweb.com PyCon TX 2006 www.python.org/pycon/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
