Author lemburg
Recipients Arfrever, Giovanni.Bajo, PaulMcMillan, Vlado.Boza, alex, arigo, benjamin.peterson, camara, christian.heimes, dmalcolm, haypo, koniiiik, lemburg, mark.dickinson, serhiy.storchaka
Date 2012-11-07.12:19:34
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <509A51D0.9030409@egenix.com>
In-reply-to <1352289964.29.0.0598620628758.issue14621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
On 07.11.2012 13:06, Mark Dickinson wrote:
> 
> Mark Dickinson added the comment:
> 
> And I'm probably repeating myself too, but: the predictability of (and difficulty of changing of) hashing for numeric types is why I'm strongly opposed to hash collision / slot collision limits:  they'd end up disallowing reasonably natural looking Python numeric sets (e.g. {2**k for k in range(n)} for smallish n).  I don't think core Python should be solving this issue at all---I think that's a job for the web frameworks.  Christian's idea of providing more suitable types in the std. lib. sounds like the right direction to me.

I definitely agree on that last sentence. Having more suitable data
types in Python (like e.g. tries, b-trees or red-black-trees) would certainly
be a better solution than trying to build everything into dictionaries.

Nice comparison:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trie
History
Date User Action Args
2012-11-07 12:19:34lemburgsetrecipients: + lemburg, arigo, mark.dickinson, haypo, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, Arfrever, alex, dmalcolm, Giovanni.Bajo, PaulMcMillan, serhiy.storchaka, Vlado.Boza, koniiiik, camara
2012-11-07 12:19:34lemburglinkissue14621 messages
2012-11-07 12:19:34lemburgcreate