On 4/25/06, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 09:52:34AM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On 4/22/06, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 01:28:06AM +0200, guido.van.rossum wrote:
> > > > +bytes_nohash(PyObject *self)
> > > > +{
> > > > + PyErr_SetString(PyExc_TypeError, "bytes objects are unhashable");
> > > > + return -1;
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > I think we might need to have a frozenbytes object too.
> >
> > I believe YAGNI. Also, I'm not keen on all these frozen variants.
> > Hands up who's ever used a frozen set or needed a frozen dict?
>
> Tuples work for those, I think.
No, unless you sort the data; you'd have to say
tuple(sorted(d.items())) -- not pretty, and probably kind of slow.
> The use case I had in mind was a
> large mapping with binary data as the keys. If there was no
> frozenbytes object then I guess the most memory efficient way of
> representing the keys would be to use unicode strings. That's ugly.
> Is there some better way?
Have you ever encountered that use case in practice? (That's what I
meant by YAGNI. :-)
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
_______________________________________________
Python-3000-checkins mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000-checkins
