It's not that easy to make a kv 'mutable' - its storage backing may be in an "immutable" store, and requiring mutability would require copy-on-write semantics. Perhaps we need a sort of read/write KV - a subclass perhaps?
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Erik Holstad <[email protected]>wrote: > Hey Stack! > I would like for KeyValue to not be immutable unless there is a good reason > for it. > When comparing kvs to get towards the kvs in the delete list it is very > nice > to be able > to not create a new KeyValue for every delete but just reassign to one > instance. >
