Benjamin Peterson schrieb: > 2009/3/1 Armin Ronacher <armin.ronac...@active-4.com>: >> Hi everybody, >> >> PEP 372 was modified so that it provides a simpler API (only the dict API >> to be exact) and it was decided to start with a Python-only implementation >> and replace it with a C version later if necessary. >> >> Annotated changes from earlier versions of the PEP: >> >> - the extra API for ordered dict was dropped to keep the interface >> simple and clean. Future versions can still be expanded but it's >> impossible to drop features later on. >> >> - To keep the implementation simple 3.1 / 2.7 will ship with a >> Python-only version of the class. It can still be rewritten in >> C if it turns out to be too slow or thread safety is required. >> >> The corresponding issue in the tracker: http://bugs.python.org/issue5397 >> Link to the PEP: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0372/ >> >> Anything else that should be done? > > Have you considered naming? I would think that "odict" or > "ordereddict" would be more consistent with other collections names > especially "defaultdict".
We're already quite inconsistent with type name casing in the collections module, so it wouldn't matter so much. (Though I'd find symmetry with defaultdict pleasing as well.) Georg _______________________________________________ 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
