Hi, I agree. But, here are the pros/cons collected from the recent list repsonses:
Pro: - more readable - newbies will encounter one of the fastest solution (.get()) before trying slower "first solutions" like (iter(set).next()) Cons: - no name consensus. get() getany() arbitrary() ? - BDFL moratorium, which I find very wise (get() is, however, no language extension, but std lib extension, which Guido did not moratorize, didn't he?) - other classes should then also be extended, like frozenset Regards, wr PS: what is the correct verb form of moratorium? Am Samstag, 24. Oktober 2009 00:49:38 schrieb Steven D'Aprano: > On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 07:53:24 am Willi Richert wrote: > > Hi, > > > > surprised about the performance of for/break provided by Vitor, I did > > some more testing. It revealed that indeed we can forget the get() > > (which was implemented as a stripped down pop()): > > I don't understand that conclusion. According to your tests, your > implementation of get() is as fast as "for x in set: break", and it's > certainly much, much more readable and straightforward. > _______________________________________________ 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
