[Python-ideas] dictionary constructor should not allow duplicate keys
Luigi Semenzato
luigi at semenzato.com
Tue May 3 12:47:07 EDT 2016
I am still not seeing good objections to not adding at least a warning.
>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:06 AM Michel Desmoulin
>> <desmoulinmichel at gmail.com <mailto:desmoulinmichel at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> With Python 3.5, you can unpack in dictionaries:
>>
>> d = {**foo, **bar}
and similarly:
> foo = 1
> bar = "1"
>
> {1: True, 2 - 1: True, foo: True, int(bar): True, int("1"): True, **{1:
> True}}
>
> But not this:
>
> {1: True, 1: True}
Probably I didn't make it sufficiently clear in my OP, but this is
only for duplicate literal keys in the same constructor, which would
cover the vast majority of user errors.
A well-known precedent is the divide-by-zero warning in C. The GNU
compiler produces a warning when, after constant folding, an
expression contains a division by zero. For instance:
test.c:9:12: warning: division by zero [-Wdiv-by-zero]
int z = 1/0;
and this:
test.c:9:12: warning: division by zero [-Wdiv-by-zero]
int z = 1/(1 - 1);
but this code doesn't produce a warning:
const int x = 0;
int z = 1/x;
For the dict constructor, I don't think that the constant folding is
even particularly useful, although it wouldn't hurt.
Implementation-wise, checking for duplicate literals while parsing is
just a matter of maintaining a hash table for that scope. This is
already done for identifiers, and probably heavily optimized, so
duplicate detection wouldn't add much code or be particularly
expensive.
More information about the Python-ideas
mailing list