> But that's what this list is for, proposing changes.

That's wordplay. The list is for proposing changes, but it's also for discussing them. I think making a suggestion (simply: using kw restraints to prevent regression) for how to implement proposed changes (kwargs as ordered dict) is not simply "not a big deal", but on-topic.

My continued defense of it is because I don't agree with the reasons put forth for it being *impossible*. For example, the claims that it is *necessary* to allow loss of order upon addition to a kw-optimized dict. I myself gave a bunch of reasons why it MIGHT not be faster (biggest so far being "str-optimization may already be implemented"), but I'm not convinced that those reasons given by others can't be worked around.

I'm not opposed to criticism of the idea. But I believe we're going to talk a lot more than necessary if people respond as if I'm convinced it WILL work, or that I am pushing for it to happen.

I'm thinking of writing up pseudo-code for it later, so I can at least share a common reference point, and solidify the concept. Or I might find that the already-implemented str-dict optimizations can't be improved upon, and report back.