Repository navigation
Weird PriorityQueue description #101777
Description
Activity
I'm not sure it needs to be changed, but if it must be, then I'd say something like "the one that would be returned by ...".
Reacted by Owain Davies and Stefan PochmannYes, that's better.
+1
- added 4 commits that reference this issue
on Feb 21, 2023 - added a commit that references this issue
on Feb 22, 2023 - added 4 commits that reference this issue
on Feb 22, 2023 - added a commit that references this issue
on Feb 23, 2023
Documentation
Someone asked Does PriorityQueue call sorted every time get is called?. First I laughed, how did they come up with that silly idea, but then I saw they got it from the doc and it really does make it sound like that:
Not only
sortedbut alsolistfirst, and of course even if the queue didn't use a heap, it should be the straightforwardmin(entries)instead. This is so over-the-top inefficient and complicated that it looks like a weird joke.Unless there's good reason for it, I suggest to add "as if" and use
min:Linked PRs
PriorityQueuedocs #102026PriorityQueuedocs slightly clearer (GH-102026) #102106PriorityQueuedocs slightly clearer (GH-102026) #102107queue.rst: use 2 spaces after a period to be consistent. #102143queue.rst: use 2 spaces after a period to be consistent. (GH-102143) #102154queue.rst: use 2 spaces after a period to be consistent. (GH-102143) #102155