Perhaps you are correct, and I will attempt to remain more constructive on
the topic (despite it being an *incredibly* frustrating experience).
However, my point remains: this is a patently false thing that is being
parroted throughout the Python community, and it's outright insulting to be
told my complaints about writing 2/3 compatible code are invalid on the
basis of "premature optimization".
-Mark
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote:
>
> Mark, your tone is no longer constructive and is hurting your case in
> arguing for anything. Please take it down a notch.
>
> On Tue Dec 16 2014 at 1:48:59 PM Mark Roberts <wiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 2:45 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Iterating accross a dictionary doesn't need compatibility shims. It's
>>> dead simple in all Python versions:
>>>
>>> $ python2
>>> Python 2.7.8 (default, Oct 20 2014, 15:05:19)
>>> [GCC 4.9.1] on linux2
>>> Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> >>> d = {'a': 1}
>>> >>> for k in d: print(k)
>>> ...
>>> a
>>>
>>> $ python3
>>> Python 3.4.2 (default, Oct 8 2014, 13:08:17)
>>> [GCC 4.9.1] on linux
>>> Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> >>> d = {'a': 1}
>>> >>> for k in d: print(k)
>>> ...
>>> a
>>>
>>> Besides, using iteritems() and friends is generally a premature
>>> optimization, unless you know you'll have very large containers.
>>> Creating a list is cheap.
>>>
>>
>> It seems to me that every time I hear this, the author is basically
>> admitting that Python is a toy language not meant for "serious computing"
>> (where serious is defined in extremely modest terms). The advice is also
>> very contradictory to literally every talk on performant Python that I've
>> seen at PyCon or PyData or ... well, anywhere. And really, doesn't it
>> strike you as incredibly presumptuous to call the *DEFAULT BEHAVIOR* of
>> Python 3 a "premature optimization"? Isn't the whole reason that the
>> default behavior switch was made is because creating lists willy nilly all
>> over the place really *ISN'T* cheap? This isn't the first time someone has
>> tried to run this line past me, but it's the first time I've been fed up
>> enough with the topic to call it complete BS on the spot. Please help me
>> stop the community at large from saying this, because it really isn't true
>> at all.
>>
>> -Mark
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>> brett%40python.org
>>
>
_______________________________________________
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
