drsalists at gmail.com
Wed Nov 17 00:12:19 CET 2010
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Armin Rigo <arigo at tunes.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Dan Stromberg <drsalists at gmail.com>
> >> So, if I understand correctly you are saying that we should rename our
> >> dbm.py to bsdb.py, and write a new dbm.py which can use either bsdb or
> > I think it's anydbm that can use whatever among dbm, bsddb, gdbm and
> > dumbdbm, as it sees fit. TTBoMK, it's not until python 3.x that dbm
> > a sort of unifying module hierarchy.
> Yes, in Python 2.x, dbm.py is very specifically an interface to the
> Unix dbm library (see e.g. man dbm_open). At the level of C, the gdbm
> interface is some kind of extension of that. It's not related to
> bsddb, which has a very different interface.
Well, there's related, and then there's related. bsddb provides a bunch of
operations, including a basic hash facility. The API is not intended to be
the same as gdbm or ndbm (gdbm has a native interface and an ndbm
compatability interface), but the concept is similar between the 3 for one
part of bsddb - the part the cpython uses.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pypy-dev