[Python-3000] have iter(mapping) generate (key, value) pairs

[Guido van Rossum]

This was already considered and rejected. See PEP 3099.

On 6/2/06, Steven Bethard <steven.bethard at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to suggest that we (at least briefly) re-consider the
> decision that iterating over a mapping generates the keys, not the
> (key, value) pairs.  This was addressed somewhat in `PEP 234`_, with
> the pros and cons basically being:
>
> * From a purity standpoint, iterating over keys keeps the symmetry
> between ``if x in y`` and ``for x in y``
> * From a practicality standpoint, iterating over keys means that most
> of the time, you'll also have to do a ``mapping[key]``, since most
> iterations access both the keys and values.
>
> I only bring this up now because Python 3000 is our opportunity to
> review old decisions, and I think there's one more argument for
> iterating over (key, value) pairs that was not discussed.  Iterating
> over (key, value) pairs allows functions like dict() and dict.update()
> to accept both mappings and (key, value) iterables, without having to
> check for a .keys() function.  Just to clarify the point, here's the
> code in UserDict.DictMixin::
>
>     def update(self, other=None, **kwargs):
>         # Make progressively weaker assumptions about "other"
>         if other is None:
>             pass
>         elif hasattr(other, 'iteritems'):  # iteritems saves memory and lookups
>             for k, v in other.iteritems():
>                 self[k] = v
>         elif hasattr(other, 'keys'):
>             for k in other.keys():
>                 self[k] = other[k]
>         else:
>             for k, v in other:
>                 self[k] = v
>         if kwargs:
>             self.update(kwargs)
>
> Note that even though the `Language Reference`_ defines mappings in
> terms of __len__, __getitem__, __setitem__, __delitem__ and __iter__,
> UserDict.DictMixin.update has to assume that all mappings have a
> .keys() method.
>
> For comparison, here's what it would look like if mappings iterated
> over (key, value) pairs::
>
>     def update(self, other=None, **kwargs):
>         if other is not None:
>             for k, v in other:
>                 self[k] = v
>         if kwargs:
>             self.update(kwargs)
>
> As far as backwards compatibility is concerned, if you need to write
> code that works in both Python 2.X and Python 3000, you just need to
> be explicit, e.g. using dict.iteritems() or dict.iterkeys() as
> necessary.  (Yes, I know that .iter* is going to be dropped, but
> that's a backward compatibility concern for another PEP, not this
> one.)
>
>
> .. _PEP 234:http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0234/
> .. _Language Reference: http://docs.python.org/ref/sequence-types.html
>
> STeVe
> --
> Grammar am for people who can't think for myself.
>         --- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
> _______________________________________________
> Python-3000 mailing list
> Python-3000 at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/guido%40python.org
>


-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)