"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:

ZODB-Dev mailing list  -  ZODB-Dev@zope.org

Reply via email to