Hi, On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Dan Stromberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> So, if I understand correctly you are saying that we should rename our >> dbm.py to bsdb.py, and write a new dbm.py which can use either bsdb or gdbm? > > I think it's anydbm that can use whatever among dbm, bsddb, gdbm and > dumbdbm, as it sees fit. TTBoMK, it's not until python 3.x that dbm becomes > a sort of unifying module hierarchy.
Yes, in Python 2.x, dbm.py is very specifically an interface to the Unix dbm library (see e.g. man dbm_open). At the level of C, the gdbm interface is some kind of extension of that. It's not related to bsddb, which has a very different interface. > Would sharing based on inheritance or a more functional approach be > preferred? I think either is fine (or even not sharing at all if it turns out to be too much of a mess in practice). A bientôt, Armin. _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
