On 2/20/06, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Feb 20, 2006, at 12:33 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > ... > > You don't need a new feature for that use case; d[k] = d.get(k, 0) + 1 > > is perfectly fine there and hard to improve upon. > > I see d[k]+=1 as a substantial improvement -- conceptually more > direct, "I've now seen one more k than I had seen before".
Yes, I now agree. This means that I'm withdrawing proposal A (new method) and championing only B (a subclass that implements __getitem__() calling on_missing() and on_missing() defined in that subclass as before, calling default_factory unless it's None). I don't think this crisis is big enough to need *two* solutions, and this example shows B's superiority over A. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
