levent wrote:
> Thanks for the answers. Enumerating in reverse is indeed quite a smart
> idea.
>
> The fact is though, I overly simplified the task in the super-hero
> example. In the real case, the dictionary keys are not necessarily the
> indices for inserts; that is to say, the inserts do not necessarily
> take place in some sorted order.
>
> I think I was thinking more of a linked-list idea, where you do not
> store the indices as integers to some random access array but rather as
> pointers into list's nodes. Then the subsequent inserts would not hurt
> previously stored pointers. For those who know a bit C++/STL here is a
> sketch of the idea:
Sorry, I don't know C++/STL, so I don't understand the example you gave.
If your dict doesn't already come with the indices, can't you just
create a dict that does?
>>> heros = ["super", "clark", "spider", "peter", "bat", "bruce"]
>>> names = dict(clark="kent", peter="parker", bruce="wayne")
>>> heros_indices = {}
>>> for index, hero_word in enumerate(heros):
... if hero_word in names:
... heros_indices[index + 1] = names[hero_word]
...
>>> for index in sorted(heros_indices, reverse=True):
... heros.insert(index, heros_indices[index])
...
>>> heros
['super', 'clark', 'kent', 'spider', 'peter', 'parker', 'bat', 'bruce',
'wayne']
STeVe
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
