Since there is voting going on, -1 on changing the guarantees of `dict`. If ordering is important, OrderedDict is more explicit and more obvious to the over reading the code, even if the underlying implementation is identical.
Good luck teaching people about why Python went from OrderedDict to UnorderedDict within a version. I remember learning about this same thing in C++ and just thinking “wut?”. And they just added a new type and said to stop using the old one – not changing something that people already understand.
Better to underspecify the default dict and offer explicitly named extensions (DefaultDict, OrderedDict, etc.) for those who want more guarantees.
Cheers,
Steve
Top-posted from my Windows phone
From: Peter Ludemann via Python-Dev
Sent: Sunday, November 5, 2017 12:53
To: Sven R. Kunze
Cc: Python-Dev
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Guarantee ordered dict literals in v3.7?
Isn't ordered dict also useful for **kwargs?
If it turns out that there's a dict implementation that's faster by not preserving order, collections.UnorderedDict could be added.
There could also be specialized implementations that pre-size the dict (cf: C++ unordered_map::reserve), etc., etc.
But these are all future things, which might not be necessary.
On 5 November 2017 at 12:44, Sven R. Kunze <srkunze@mail.de> wrote: