Re: Python 3: dict & dict.keys()

References	(1 earlier) <ksnrr9$k4t$1@ger.gmane.org> <CAHVvXxQGCFJe7ud+mwh4zhnq5F7xvHJX1pCtGCjMaFtjBwY=iQ@mail.gmail.com> <51EFF957.1040707@stoneleaf.us> <CAPTjJmrnN-13PpKv7LTv6tTH1Tp_zdLj_tsy4NUyDwbm-esB7Q@mail.gmail.com> <ksp26j$sfp$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date	2013-07-25 03:58 +1000
Subject	Re: Python 3: dict & dict.keys()
From	Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.5057.1374688738.3114.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:17 AM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
> On 7/24/2013 12:34 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> Side point: Why is iterating over a dict equivalent to .keys() rather
>> than .items()? It feels odd that, with both options viable, the
>> implicit version iterates over half the dict instead of all of it.
>> Obviously it can't be changed now, even if .items() were the better
>> choice, but I'm curious as to the reason for the decision.
>
> This is
> coupled with the fact that the default meaning of 'item in collection' is
> that iterating over 'collection' eventually produces 'item' or a value equal
> to 'item'.

Ahh, that makes sense. I never thought of iteration and 'in' being
connected like that, but yes, that's a solid reason for doing it that
way.

ChrisA

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Python 3: dict & dict.keys() Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-07-25 03:58 +1000

csiph-web