[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-26 Thread Mark Dickinson
Changes by Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file30019/issue17794.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794 ___

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-26 Thread Mark Dickinson
Changes by Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com: -- nosy: -mark.dickinson ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794 ___ ___

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-26 Thread Daniel Wong
Daniel Wong added the comment: btw, I have a related patch: http://bugs.python.org/issue17834 Chances of it being accepted aren't looking good right now though. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-25 Thread Mark Dickinson
Mark Dickinson added the comment: Hmm. It's true that Python 3's comparison rules make PriorityQueue a bit less useful in its current form. One possible workaround could be to introduce an optional key argument to the constructor that provides a callable used to map objects added to the

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-25 Thread Mark Dickinson
Mark Dickinson added the comment: Example patch. Items with equal priority are retrieved in LIFO order. -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file30017/issue17794.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-25 Thread Mark Dickinson
Changes by Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com: Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file30018/issue17794.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794 ___

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-25 Thread Mark Dickinson
Changes by Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file30017/issue17794.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794 ___

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-25 Thread Mark Dickinson
Mark Dickinson added the comment: Hmm. This looks like a duplicate of #7174. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794 ___ ___

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-25 Thread Mark Dickinson
Mark Dickinson added the comment: Fixed patch. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file30019/issue17794.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794 ___

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-25 Thread Mark Dickinson
Changes by Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file30018/issue17794.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794 ___

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-25 Thread Raymond Hettinger
Raymond Hettinger added the comment: I'm working on this one. Expect a patch shortly. -- assignee: - rhettinger ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17794 ___

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-24 Thread Daniel Wong
Daniel Wong added the comment: from the peanut gallery: This looks right to me; you are seeing that PriorityQueue is trying to compare dicts, because that's how tuple comparison works: it is lexicographic. Since the first element of the two tuples that you are trying to insert have the same

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-18 Thread Carlos Ferreira
New submission from Carlos Ferreira: I'm using Priority Queues and followed the Python documentation for a simple example. From Queue documentation in Python 3.3 http://docs.python.org/3.3/library/queue.html The lowest valued entries are retrieved first (the lowest valued entry is the one

[issue17794] Priority Queue

2013-04-18 Thread R. David Murray
R. David Murray added the comment: It is a bug of some sort. A doc bug if nothing else. This is probably due to the fact that everything was sortable in python2, and the doc and/or code hasn't been updated to account for the fact that many things aren't in Python3. -- nosy: