Hi Jim,
On 18 April 2014 23:46, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> (2) Is "the item will be hashed at least once" a language guarantee?
I think that a reasonable implementation needs to hash at least once
all keys that are added to the dictionary. Otherwise we end up, as
you said, with a dictionary that c
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 20:05, Victor Stinner wrote:
> Does it mean that depending of the number of items, keys can be mutable?
> It
> sounds like a terrible idea.
I believe Jim is talking about internal implementation.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Pytho
Does it mean that depending of the number of items, keys can be mutable? It
sounds like a terrible idea.
Victor
Le vendredi 18 avril 2014, Jim J. Jewett a écrit :
> (1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
> made in a dict lookup is an implementation detail. (Plea
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 17:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 02:57:55PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 14:46, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> > > (1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
> > > made in a dict lookup is an impleme
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 02:57:55PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 14:46, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> > (1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
> > made in a dict lookup is an implementation detail. (Please correct me
> > if I am wrong.)
>
> Ab
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 14:46, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> (1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
> made in a dict lookup is an implementation detail. (Please correct me
> if I am wrong.)
Absolutely.
>
> (2) Is "the item will be hashed at least once" a language guar
