On Wed, Jun 26, 2002, Tim Peters wrote:
Should this PEP be split in two, then? One for a new "AbstractData" package (that would include the heap algorithm) and one for an update to Queue that would use some algorithm from AbstractData. The latter might not even need a PEP.
I'm chuckling, but to myself <wink>. By the time you add all the bells and whistles everyone may want out of "a priority queue", the interface gets so frickin' complicated that almost everyone will ignore the library and call bisect.insort() themself.
Fair enough -- but I didn't really know about bisect myself. Looking at the docs for bisect, it says that the code might be best used as a source code example. I think that having a package to dump similar kinds of code might be a good idea. It's not a substitute for a CS course, but...
And so on. It's easier to write appropriate code from scratch in Python than to figure out how to *use* a package profligate enough to contain canned solutions for all common and reasonable use cases. People have been known to gripe at the number of methods Python's simple little lists and dicts have sprouted -- heh heh.
Actually, I was expecting that the Queue PEP would be dropped once the AbstractData package got some momentum behind. I was just trying to be a tiny bit subtle. <wink>