[Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com>] > Starting with "collections.OrderedSet" seems like a reasonable idea, > though - that way "like a built-in set, but insertion order preserving" will > have an obvious and readily available answer, and it should also > make performance comparisons easier.
Ya, I suggested starting with collections.OrderedSet earlier, but gave up on it. The problem is that the "use case" here isn't really a matter of functionality, but of consistency: "it would be nice if", like dicts enjoy now, the iteration order of sets was defined in an implementation-independent way. That itch isn't scratched unless the builtin set type defines it. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/PM5ENMLR665XG32AS2FEAEUVDG3AFWV6/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
