On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:45:16PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Ok, I have a better (IMO) proposal:
>
> >>> d = TransformDict(str.casefold, {'Foo': 1})
> >>> d.getitem('foo')
> ('Foo', 1)
> >>> d.getitem('bar')
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
> KeyError: 'bar'
Is it more common to want both the canonical key and value at the same
time, or to just want the canonical key? My gut feeling is that I'm
likely to have code like this:
d = TransformDict(...)
for key in data:
key = d.get_canonical(key)
value = d[key]
print("{}: {}".format(key, value))
in which case having a single call to return both will be great:
for key in data:
key, value = d.getitem(key)
print("{}: {}".format(key, value))
but I'm really not sure. Maybe Ethan is right.
I think these sorts of associated questions are why some people
(Raymond, Nick) want to see the proposal live outside of the standard
library for a while first. The general idea is great, but we're going to
bike shed the API without having much idea of how it will actually be
used.
So, my suggestion is this:
- Let's add __transform__ to dicts for 3.4, similar to __missing__, and
see how people end up using it in the real world.
- Then, in 3.5, we can make a much better informed decision about the
best API for a TransformedDict front-end to __transform__.
+1 on __transform__ method on dicts.
+0 on TransformedDict in 3.4
+1 on waiting for 3.5 based on experience on using __transform__.
--
Steven
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
