[Python-Dev] Re: Un-stalling Berkeley DB support

[Gregory P . Smith]

On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 02:03:21PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> 
> When we last discussed this subject, there was general support for the
> functionality, but a couple of people went "bletch!" about SWIG-generated
> code (there was unhappiness about pointers being treated as strings).
> 
> Somebody said something about having SWIG patches to address this.  Is this
> the only real issue with SWIG-generated code?  If so, we can pursue two paths:
> (1) Hand Greg a patched SWIG so he can release a 2.1.2 version of the DB
> extension that meets our cleanliness criteria, and (2) press the SWIG guy 
> to incorporate these patches in his next release.

I'm not surprised to see the "bletch!" for SWIG's string/pointer things,
they are technically gross.  Anyone know what SWIG v1.3a3 does (v1.3
is a total rewrite from v1.1)?  py-bsddb3 as distributed was build
using SWIG v1.1-883.  In the meantime, if someone knows of a version of
SWIG that does this better, try using it to build bsddb3 (just pass a
SWIG=/usr/spam/eggs/bin/swig to the Makefile).  If you run into problems,
send them and a copy of that swig my way.

I'll take a quick look at SWIG v1.3alpha3 here and see what that does.

Greg