> I disagree with having the ordering embedded into the map implementation. Good thing that's not what they are asking at all. They just want an ordered map to

> I disagree with having the ordering embedded into the map implementation. Good thing that's not what they are asking at all. They just want an ordered map to be in the standard library. > That imposes an unnecessary performance overhead to support a small subset of use cases. Naturally ordered hash maps generally have a small performance hit on lookup and a performance gain on iteration, as iteration goes through a dense array. Linked hash maps do tend to have worse performances for all cases. > I think what the author requires is iterating over a sorted list of keys. Had they needed that, they'd have said that. But they did not. And they specifically refer to an ordered map, and to Python's built-in and Ordered dicts, which are not sorted.