On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > Typically, the purpose of a database is to persist data across program > runs. So typically, your suggestion would only help if there were a way > to persist the primed Pickler across runs.
I haven't followed all this, but isn't is at least possible to conceive of the primed pickler as being recreated from scratch from constant data each run? > (The primed Unpickler is not quite so important because it can be primed > by reading a pickle of the primer, which in turn can be stored somewhere > in the DB.) > > In the particular case of cvs2svn, each of our databases is in fact > written in a single pass, and then in later passes only read, not > written. So I suppose we could do entirely without pickleable Picklers, > if they were copyable within a single program run. But that constraint > would make the feature even less general. Being copyable is mostly equivalent to being picklable, but it's probably somewhat weaker because it's easier to define it as a pointer copy for some types that aren't easily picklable. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
