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