On 2/17/06, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I really don't like that defaultdict (or a dict extension) means that > x[not_found] will have noticeable side effects. This all seems to be a > roundabout way to address one important use case of a dictionary with > multiple values for each key, and in the process breaking an important > quality of good Python code, that attribute and getitem access not have > noticeable side effects. > > So, here's a proposed interface for a new multidict object, borrowing > some methods from Set but mostly from dict. Some things that seemed > particularly questionable to me are marked with ??.
Have you seen my revised proposal (which is indeed an addition to the standard dict rather than a subclass)? Your multidict addresses only one use case for the proposed behavior; what's so special about dicts of lists that they should have special support? What about dicts of dicts, dicts of sets, dicts of user-defined objects? -- --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
