Author eric.smith
Recipients Arfrever, barry, eli.bendersky, eric.araujo, eric.smith, ethan.furman, georg.brandl, mrabarnett, pitrou, r.david.murray, rhettinger, sbt, serhiy.storchaka, theller, tim.peters, vstinner
Date 2013-09-17.14:12:43
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <52386357.3060701@trueblade.com>
In-reply-to <1379424857.28.0.36214787221.issue18986@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
On 09/17/2013 09:34 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
> 
> R. David Murray added the comment:
> 
> Because most often the time at which you want the original key is the point at which you are about to re-serialize the data...so you need the value too.

I can't think of a case where I'd need (original_key, value) where I
wouldn't also be iterating over items(). Especially so if I'm serializing.

On the other hand, I don't have a use case for the original key, anyway.
So I don't have a strong feeling about this, other than it feels odd
that the answer to the original question (I think on python-dev) "how do
we get the original key back?" is answered by "by giving you the
original key and its value".
History
Date User Action Args
2013-09-17 14:12:43eric.smithsetrecipients: + eric.smith, tim.peters, barry, theller, georg.brandl, rhettinger, pitrou, vstinner, eric.araujo, mrabarnett, Arfrever, r.david.murray, eli.bendersky, ethan.furman, sbt, serhiy.storchaka
2013-09-17 14:12:43eric.smithlinkissue18986 messages
2013-09-17 14:12:43eric.smithcreate