alex.gaynor at gmail.com
Tue Mar 31 19:33:07 CEST 2009
On Mar 31, 11:06 am, pataphor <patap... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 06:03:13 -0700 (PDT)
> Alex_Gaynor <alex.gay... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > My inclination would be to more or less *just* have it implement the
> > set API, the way ordered dict does in 2.7/3.1.
> As far as I can tell all that would be needed is read/write access to
> two key variables: The iterator start position and the underlying map.
> There is no need for more than basic set API since people can use
> those two variables to subclass their own iterators.
The only issue with that is if we ever moved it to a C implementation
we'd probably use a more conventional linked list.
More information about the Python-list