[issue44281] Links on top of collections doc not in the order of sections

[Raymond Hettinger]

Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> added the comment:

ISTM that the table order doesn't need to match because the links take you directly to the section of interest.  They make it so that you don't need to know the order of sections below.  Currently, they have a "logical" grouping with the two sequence-like objects side-by-side, the four dict or dict-like subclasses side-by-side, and the other "User" classes side-by-side.

The order of the sections below is in alpha order (with the minor exception of deque and defaultdict being swapped).  This is also reasonable because a person would likely be scanning the Table of Contents looking for the class or function by its name.

This is really no different than a lending library having a title catalog and a subject catalog with the same information arranged in two different ways.  Both ways have value.

Thank you for the suggestion, but the existing ordering was intentional and is useful.  Possibly, we could swap the *deque* and *defaultdict* sections, but the benefit is very minor and likely isn't worth the churn.

----------
resolution:  -> rejected
stage:  -> resolved
status: open -> closed

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue44281>
_______________________________________