Suggestion: make sequence and map interfaces more similar

[Mark Lawrence]

On 01/04/2016 08:59, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 31-03-16 om 16:12 schreef Mark Lawrence via Python-list:
>> On 31/03/2016 14:27, Random832 wrote:
>>> So can we discuss how a unified method to get a set of all valid
>>> subscripts (and/or subscript-value pairs) on an object would be a useful
>>> thing to have without getting bogged down in theoretical claptrap about
>>> the meaning of the mapping contract?
>>>
>>
>> We can discuss anything here until the cows come home, but it's a
>> complete waste of time if the powers that be over on python-ideas
>> and/or python-dev don't agree.  This was suggested a day or two back
>> but seems to have gone completely over people's heads.
>
> Just because you are not interested, doesn't mean it's a complete waste of time.
> Discussions like this often enough produce suggestions on how one could handle
> these things within python without the need for the powers that be to agree on
> anything.
>
> If you are not interested just don't contribute. Others can make up their own
> mind on whether this is a waste of their time or not.
>

Who said I'm not interested?  It is a simple fact of life in Python 
world that anything that gets discussed has to go through python-dev, 
and possibly python-ideas first.  You can spend years discussing 
anything you like here and get 100% agreement, but if the devlopers say 
no it does not happen.

I believe that this proposal is like trying to change the design of the 
Morris Minor and a McClaren Mercedes because they're both cars, so you 
can make them similar.

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence