Hi Chris,
On 15.05.13 13:32 Christian Tismer wrote:
Hi Raymond,
On 08.01.13 15:49, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 3:44 AM, Raymond Hettinger
<raymond.hettin...@gmail.com> wrote:
The current memory layout for dictionaries is
unnecessarily inefficient. It has a sparse table of
24-byte entries containing the hash value, key pointer,
and value pointer.
...
What is the current status of this discussion?
I'd like to know whether it is a considered alternative implementation.
There is also a discussion in python-ideas right now where this
alternative is mentioned, and I think especially for small dicts
as **kwargs, it could be a cheap way to introduce order.
Is this going on, somewhere? I'm quite interested on that.
+1 I am also interested on the status. Many people seemed to have copied
the recipe from the activestate site (was it?) but I wonder if it maybe
was to cool to be progressed into "the field" or simply some
understandable lack of resources?
All the best,
Stefan
_______________________________________________
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
