[Python-Dev] Un-stalling Berkeley DB support

[M.-A. Lemburg]

"Eric S. Raymond" wrote:
> [Berkeley DB 3]
> 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).

AFAIK, recent versions of SWIG now make proper use of PyCObjects
to store pointers. Don't know how well this works though: I've
had a report that the new support can cause core dumps.
 
> 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.

Perhaps these patches are what I was talking about above ?!

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
______________________________________________________________________
Business:                                      http://www.lemburg.com/
Python Pages:                           http://www.lemburg.com/python/