Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #84030
| From | Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Trees |
| Date | 2015-01-19 23:01 +0000 |
| References | <CAG=hEY1L-39EmuWpdEh_n-BNfs=qG9nL=MrMT0ar72yGBrkoUA@mail.gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.17865.1421708518.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 19/01/2015 22:06, Zachary Gilmartin wrote: > Why aren't there trees in the python standard library? > Probably because you'd never get agreement as to which specific tree and which specific implementation was the most suitable for inclusion. -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Trees Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-19 23:01 +0000
Re: Trees Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-20 07:19 +0200
Re: Trees Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-20 14:21 +0000
Re: Trees Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-20 09:42 -0800
Re: Trees Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-20 22:25 +0200
csiph-web