[Python-checkins] r70012 - peps/trunk/pep-0372.txt
raymond.hettinger
python-checkins at python.org
Fri Feb 27 05:32:12 CET 2009
Author: raymond.hettinger
Date: Fri Feb 27 05:32:11 2009
New Revision: 70012
Log:
Update PEP based on latest version of recipe, based on integration testing, and based on newsgroup feedback.
Modified:
peps/trunk/pep-0372.txt
Modified: peps/trunk/pep-0372.txt
==============================================================================
--- peps/trunk/pep-0372.txt (original)
+++ peps/trunk/pep-0372.txt Fri Feb 27 05:32:11 2009
@@ -143,22 +143,19 @@
This behavior is consistent with existing implementations in
Python, the PHP array and the hashmap in Ruby 1.9.
-Why is there no ``odict.insert()``?
-
- There are few situations where you really want to insert a key at
- a specified index. To avoid API complication, the proposed
- solution for this situation is creating a list of items,
- manipulating that and converting it back into an odict:
-
- >>> d = odict([('a', 42), ('b', 23), ('c', 19)])
- >>> l = d.items()
- >>> l.insert(1, ('x', 0))
- >>> odict(l)
- collections.odict([('a', 42), ('x', 0), ('b', 23), ('c', 19)])
-
-Is the ordered dict a dict subclass?
+Is the ordered dict a dict subclass? Why?
Yes. Like ``defaultdict``, ``odict`` subclasses ``dict``.
+ Being a dict subclass confers speed upon methods that aren't overridden
+ like ``__getitem__`` and ``__len__``. Also, being a dict gives the
+ most utility with tools that were expecting regular dicts (like the
+ json module).
+
+Do any limitations arise from subclassing dict?
+
+ Yes. Since the API for dicts is different in Py2.x and Py3.x, the
+ odict API must also be different (i.e. Py2.6 needs to override
+ iterkeys, itervalues, and iteritems).
Does ``odict.popitem()`` return a particular key/value pair?
@@ -166,8 +163,8 @@
corresponding value. This corresponds to the usual LIFO behavior
exhibited by traditional push/pop pairs. It is semantically
equivalent to ``k=list(od)[-1]; v=od[k]; del od[k]; return (k,v)``.
- The actual implementation is more efficient. It is O(n log n)
- on the first call, any successive calls are O(1).
+ The actual implementation is more efficient and pops directly
+ off of a sorted list of keys.
Does odict support indexing, slicing, and whatnot?
@@ -184,6 +181,50 @@
dbm) is likely a better fit. It would be a mistake to try to be all
things to all users.
+How well does odict work with the json module and PyYAML?
+
+ For json, the good news is that json's encoder respects odict's iteration order:
+
+ >>> items = [('one', 1), ('two', 2), ('three',3), ('four',4), ('five',5)]
+ >>> json.dumps(OrderedDict(items))
+ '{"one": 1, "two": 2, "three": 3, "four": 4, "five": 5}'
+
+ The bad news is that the object_hook for json decoders will pass in an
+ already built dictionary so that the order is lost before the object
+ hook sees it:
+
+ >>> jtext = '{"one": 1, "two": 2, "three": 3, "four": 4, "five": 5}'
+ >>> json.loads(jtext, object_hook=OrderedDict)
+ OrderedDict({u'four': 4, u'three': 3, u'five': 5, u'two': 2, u'one': 1})
+
+ For PyYAML, a full round-trip is problem free:
+
+ >>> ytext = yaml.dump(OrderedDict(items))
+ >>> print ytext
+ !!python/object/apply:collections.OrderedDict
+ - - [one, 1]
+ - [two, 2]
+ - [three, 3]
+ - [four, 4]
+ - [five, 5]
+
+ >>> yaml.load(ytext)
+ OrderedDict({'one': 1, 'two': 2, 'three': 3, 'four': 4, 'five': 5})
+
+How does odict handle equality testing?
+
+ Being a dict, one might expect equality tests to not care about order. For
+ an odict to dict comparison, this would be a necessity and it's probably
+ not wise to silently switch comparison modes based on the input types.
+ Also, some third-party tools that expect dict inputs may also expect the
+ comparison to not care about order. Accordingly, we decided to punt and
+ let the usual dict equality testing run without reference to internal
+ ordering. This should be documented clearly since different people will
+ have different expectations. If a use case does arise, it's not hard to
+ explicitly craft an order based comparison:
+ ``list(od1.items())==list(od2.items())``.
+
+
Reference Implementation
========================
More information about the Python-checkins
mailing list