On 6/29/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I disagree. You can get everything you need with a dict, and making > sets a part of the language (besides being a builtin type), would > necessarily add more overhead and maintenance to the language for little > gain. If you need set-like functionality, and you need it to not be > finalized, use a dict; it is available today, can do all the same things, and > you don't need to wait at least 1.5 years until Python 2.6 is out. >
That was a purely altruistic proposal. I've already discovered that sets are finalized and that some code that works with dict emulating a set may not work with a set. It will not make much difference for me if my proposal will be implemented in 2.6 or even in 3.0, but the sooner it will happen the fewer people will stumble on the same problem that I did. I also feel that dummy allocated on the heap and the free set list are complicating the code with no gain. Given negaive feedback, I will probably not try to make a patch, but such patch would mostly consist of removed lines. _______________________________________________ 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
