"Tim Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [Dmitry Vasiliev] >> Since then I've changed my mind and almost haven't used setdefault(). So >> now I'm only +0 on the idea. :-) I think pop() is even more useful than >> setdefault(), I've planned to use it for some persistent queue >> implementation (based on BTrees). So if setdefault() will be added I >> think it would be also useful to add the pop() method. > > Since setdefault() is going into ZODB 3.5 (I'm going to merge Ruslan's > branch into the trunk today), if anyone <hint> would like to code up pop() > implementations too, I won't object. Overall, I like pop() better than > setdefault() too. > Do you think code for pop() should go into separate branch?
_______________________________________________ For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki: http://www.zope.org/Wikis/ZODB/ ZODB-Dev mailing list - ZODB-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zodb-dev