Message197990
| 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年09月17日.14:19:52 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<52386504.8060102@trueblade.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<52386357.3060701@trueblade.com> |
| Content |
On 09/17/2013 10:12 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> 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".
I meant: I don't have a use case for finding the original key outside of
iterating over items(). |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2013年09月17日 14:19:52 | eric.smith | set | recipients:
+ 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年09月17日 14:19:52 | eric.smith | link | issue18986 messages |
| 2013年09月17日 14:19:52 | eric.smith | create |
|