➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2014-11-28 22:42 by Antony.Lee, last changed 2022-04-11 14:58 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Messages (3) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg231835 - (view) | Author: Antony Lee (Antony.Lee) * | Date: 2014-11-28 22:42 | |
It would be nice if dbm.open() supported the "x" flag that open() now supports (create a new db, failing if it already exists). |
|||
| msg342280 - (view) | Author: Batuhan Taskaya (BTaskaya) *  |
Date: 2019-05-13 02:35 | |
Python directly passes flags to gdbm (or whatever the dbm interface is). gdbm_open((char *)file, 0, flags, mode, NULL)) # _gdbmmodule.c:76 I dont think it is good idea to wrap gdbm for just a flag. |
|||
| msg350102 - (view) | Author: Serhiy Storchaka (serhiy.storchaka) * |
Date: 2019-08-21 19:24 | |
Agree with Batuhan. There are three dbm implementations in the stdlib: dumb, ndbm and gnu. It may be possible to implement the "x" flag in the former two, but gdbm_open() does not support it. Since by default the implementation is chosen automatically in dbm.open(), I do not think it is practically to implement a flag which do not work with all implementations. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:58:10 | admin | set | github: 67153 |
| 2019-08-21 19:24:49 | serhiy.storchaka | set | status: open -> closed nosy: + serhiy.storchaka messages: + msg350102 resolution: rejected stage: needs patch -> resolved |
| 2019-05-13 05:33:52 | Antony.Lee | set | nosy:
- Antony.Lee |
| 2019-05-13 02:35:25 | BTaskaya | set | nosy:
+ BTaskaya messages: + msg342280 |
| 2015-03-09 14:59:15 | Claudiu.Popa | set | nosy:
+ Claudiu.Popa |
| 2014-11-28 22:53:18 | berker.peksag | set | nosy:
+ berker.peksag stage: needs patch type: enhancement versions: + Python 3.5, - Python 3.4 |
| 2014-11-28 22:42:31 | Antony.Lee | create | |