Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #26533
| Date | 2012-08-05 07:09 -0700 |
|---|---|
| From | Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> |
| Subject | Re: dbf.py API question |
| References | <501AA304.3090000@stoneleaf.us> <CAPz=1FSPc7cfxn+rbRWwo67SjOXV_DmOO=_R1tq2jLTkOXsntQ@mail.gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.2961.1344176168.4697.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
Ole Martin Bjørndalen wrote: > On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> wrote: >> SQLite has a neat feature where if you give it a the file-name of ':memory:' >> the resulting table is in memory and not on disk. I thought it was a cool >> feature, but expanded it slightly: any name surrounded by colons results in >> an in-memory table. >> >> I'm looking at the same type of situation with indices, but now I'm >> wondering if the :name: method is not pythonic and I should use a flag >> (in_memory=True) when memory storage instead of disk storage is desired. >> >> Thoughts? > > I agree that the flag would be more pythonic in dbf.py. > > I was not aware that you are adding sqlite functionality to your > library. This is very cool! Actually, I'm not. I had stumbled across that one tidbit and thought it was cool, but cool is not always pythonic. ;) > I am considering adding a "streaming=True" flag which would make the > table class a record generator, You can do this by implementing either __getitem__ or __iter__, unless the streaming flag would also make your table not in memory. > I hope this can help you somehow in your decision making process. All comments appreciated. Thanks! ~Ethan~
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: dbf.py API question Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2012-08-05 07:09 -0700
csiph-web