From 26588222b37bf65238eb2d43e2c635213636f3e3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Guido van Rossum Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 02:44:04 +0000 Subject: Add Raymond H to the list of authors; add some XXX comments about possible API improvements. --- Lib/sets.py | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/Lib/sets.py b/Lib/sets.py index 7b15aa5..344bcd2 100644 --- a/Lib/sets.py +++ b/Lib/sets.py @@ -51,6 +51,9 @@ what's tested is actually `z in y'. # # - Guido van Rossum rewrote much of the code, made some API changes, # and cleaned up the docstrings. +# +# - Raymond Hettinger implemented a number of speedups and other +# improvements. __all__ = ['BaseSet', 'Set', 'ImmutableSet'] @@ -67,6 +70,7 @@ class BaseSet(object): """This is an abstract class.""" # Don't call this from a concrete subclass! if self.__class__ is BaseSet: + # XXX Maybe raise TypeError instead, like basestring()? raise NotImplementedError, ("BaseSet is an abstract class. " "Use Set or ImmutableSet.") @@ -285,6 +289,8 @@ class ImmutableSet(BaseSet): def __init__(self, seq): """Construct an immutable set from a sequence.""" + # XXX Maybe this should default seq to None? + # XXX Creating an empty immutable set is not unheard of. self._hashcode = None self._data = data = {} # I don't know a faster way to do this in pure Python. @@ -296,6 +302,9 @@ class ImmutableSet(BaseSet): value = True # XXX Should this perhaps look for _as_immutable? # XXX If so, should use self.update(seq). + # XXX (Well, ImmutableSet doesn't have update(); the base + # XXX class could have _update() which does this though, and + # XXX we could use that here and in Set.update().) for key in seq: data[key] = value -- cgit v0.12