Message268997
| Author |
serhiy.storchaka |
| Recipients |
Demur Rumed, abarry, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka |
| Date |
2016年06月21日.13:43:10 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1466516590.47.0.552105966321.issue27358@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I think this kills the optimization effect for non-dicts.
See on PyDict_Merge(). It takes the boolean parameter that controls the behavior in case of matching keys. I think the best would be to rename it to say _PyDict_MergeEx(), extend the boolean parameter to ternary parameter, and raise an exception if it is in the third state and matching keys are found. PyDict_Merge() would be implemented as a simple wrapper around _PyDict_MergeEx(). We should check wherever this affects the performance of dict.update(). |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2016年06月21日 13:43:10 | serhiy.storchaka | set | recipients:
+ serhiy.storchaka, rhettinger, abarry, Demur Rumed |
| 2016年06月21日 13:43:10 | serhiy.storchaka | set | messageid: <1466516590.47.0.552105966321.issue27358@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016年06月21日 13:43:10 | serhiy.storchaka | link | issue27358 messages |
| 2016年06月21日 13:43:10 | serhiy.storchaka | create |
|