On 11/17/05, Thomas Lotze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tim Peters wrote:
> >     The need for this class has been largely supplanted by the
> >     ability to subclass directly from dict ...
> Yes, that's exactly what I was referring to.
> > I agree pop() should be added.  Work up a patch, or at least open a bug
> > report?
> I can do the patch, and I should even be able to check it in. Would
> anybody object?
> > Note that there are two relevant classes, PersistentDict and
> > PersistentMapping.  The code duplication there sucks (particularly because
> > they can-- and do --get out of synch), and one of them should be deprecated.
> Was there ever a semantic difference, maybe along the lines of mapping
> interface vs dict implementation?

No.  At some point there was a ZODB4 project, where I decided to call
a spade a spade and rename PersistentMapping to PersistentDict.  IIRC
when ZODB4 was killed and some of its ideas and implementations merged
back into ZODB3, the renaming stuck.  The renaming ended up being a
big pain for compatibility, so the old name was restored, too.

For more information about ZODB, see the ZODB Wiki:

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

Reply via email to