This all likes fine to me, but it made me realize we never fixed the implementation of __getitem__(). If an object is missing a key, then it should raise a KeyError when __getitem__ is called. In contrast, we just have it returning None if the key is missing. The code will definitely function, but this is slightly non-standard behavior.
Realistically, how we want to implement it is have __getitem__ raise a KeyError, and then instead of a series of if statements, it should be a series of try..except blocks. Other than that implementation detail that's not directly related to this PR, the logic of this seems fine to me.
This all likes fine to me, but it made me realize we never fixed the implementation of
__getitem__(). If an object is missing a key, then it should raise aKeyErrorwhen__getitem__is called. In contrast, we just have it returningNoneif the key is missing. The code will definitely function, but this is slightly non-standard behavior.Realistically, how we want to implement it is have
__getitem__raise aKeyError, and then instead of a series ofifstatements, it should be a series oftry..exceptblocks. Other than that implementation detail that's not directly related to this PR, the logic of this seems fine to me.