Mark Dickinson <dickinsm <at> gmail.com> writes: > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 7:13 AM, John Barham <jbarham <at> gmail.com> wrote: > > If you play around a bit it becomes clear that what set.pop() returns > > is independent of the insertion order: > > It might look like that, but I don't think this is > true in general (at least, with the current implementation):
Not to mention that other implementations (Jython, etc.) will probably exhibit yet different behaviour, and the CPython hash functions are not engraved in stone either. If you want to write portable code, you can't rely on *any* reproduceable ordering for random set member access. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
