Generalize dictionary() to accept a sequence of 2-sequences. At the

outer level, the iterator protocol is used for memory-efficiency (the
outer sequence may be very large if fully materialized); at the inner
level, PySequence_Fast() is used for time-efficiency (these should
always be sequences of length 2).

dictobject.c, new functions PyDict_{Merge,Update}FromSeq2.  These are
wholly analogous to PyDict_{Merge,Update}, but process a sequence-of-2-
sequences argument instead of a mapping object.  For now, I left these
functions file static, so no corresponding doc changes.  It's tempting
to change dict.update() to allow a sequence-of-2-seqs argument too.

Also changed the name of dictionary's keyword argument from "mapping"
to "x".  Got a better name?  "mapping_or_sequence_of_pairs" isn't
attractive, although more so than "mosop" <wink>.

abstract.h, abstract.tex:  Added new PySequence_Fast_GET_SIZE function,
much faster than going thru the all-purpose PySequence_Size.

libfuncs.tex:
- Document dictionary().
- Fiddle tuple() and list() to admit that their argument is optional.
- The long-winded repetitions of "a sequence, a container that supports
  iteration, or an iterator object" is getting to be a PITA.  Many
  months ago I suggested factoring this out into "iterable object",
  where the definition of that could include being explicit about
  generators too (as is, I'm not sure a reader outside of PythonLabs
  could guess that "an iterator object" includes a generator call).
- Please check my curly braces -- I'm going blind <0.9 wink>.

abstract.c, PySequence_Tuple():  When PyObject_GetIter() fails, leave
its error msg alone now (the msg it produces has improved since
PySequence_Tuple was generalized to accept iterable objects, and
PySequence_Tuple was also stomping on the msg in cases it shouldn't
have even before PyObject_GetIter grew a better msg).

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions