The OrderedDict will preserve any order that it has access to. The only way to pass ordered data to it to initialize is to pass a list (or, more generally, an iterable) of key-value pairs, as in your last two examples. As the documentation you linked to says, the OrderedDict does not have access to … Read more
You are doing it wrong. You need not only to insert values sequentially into dictionary, but also remove some elements and see how the order has changed after this. The next code demonstrates this: OrderedDictionary od = new OrderedDictionary(); Dictionary<String, String> d = new Dictionary<String, String>(); Random r = new Random(); for (int i = … Read more
Your problem is that you are constructing a dict to give the initial data to the OrderedDict – this dict doesn’t store any order, so the order is lost before it gets to the OrderedDict. The solution is to build from an ordered data type – the easiest being a list of tuples: >>> from … Read more
First, I don’t understand why you are adding all the keys and values count times, Index is never used. I tried this example : var source = new BindingSource(); List<MyStruct> list = new List<MyStruct> { new MyStruct(“fff”, “b”), new MyStruct(“c”,”d”) }; source.DataSource = list; grid.DataSource = source; and that work pretty well, I get two … Read more
If its an OrderedDict() you can easily access the elements by indexing by getting the tuples of (key,value) pairs as follows >>> import collections >>> d = collections.OrderedDict() >>> d[‘foo’] = ‘python’ >>> d[‘bar’] = ‘spam’ >>> d.items() [(‘foo’, ‘python’), (‘bar’, ‘spam’)] >>> d.items()[0] (‘foo’, ‘python’) >>> d.items()[1] (‘bar’, ‘spam’) Note for Python 3.X dict.items … Read more
You’ll have to create a new one since OrderedDict is sorted by insertion order. In your case the code would look like this: foo = OrderedDict(sorted(foo.iteritems(), key=lambda x: x[1][‘depth’])) See http://docs.python.org/dev/library/collections.html#ordereddict-examples-and-recipes for more examples. Note for Python 3 you will need to use .items() instead of .iteritems().
This is because of the definition of Dictionaries: Dictionary A dictionary stores associations between keys of the same type and values of the same type in an collection with no defined ordering. There is no order, they might come out differently than they were put in. This is comparable to NSSet. Edit: NSDictionary Dictionaries Collect … Read more
Implementing a generic OrderedDictionary isn’t terribly difficult, but it’s unnecessarily time consuming and frankly this class is a huge oversight on Microsoft’s part. There are multiple ways of implementing this, but I chose to use a KeyedCollection for my internal storage. I also chose to implement various methods for sorting the way that List<T> does … Read more
You are creating a dictionary first, then passing that dictionary to an OrderedDict. For Python versions < 3.6 (*), by the time you do that, the ordering is no longer going to be correct. dict is inherently not ordered. Pass in a sequence of tuples instead: ship = [(“NAME”, “Albatross”), (“HP”, 50), (“BLASTERS”, 13), (“THRUSTERS”, … Read more
For a regular dict, you can use: mydict[k_new] = mydict.pop(k_old) This will move the item to the end of the dict, unless k_new was already existing in which case it will overwrite the value in-place. For a Python 3.7+ dict where you additionally want to preserve the ordering, the simplest is to rebuild an entirely … Read more