You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have no idea why any of this is there of how it work. It seems to me that the DB layer was meant to be an easy-to-use, efficient object storage, but it is nothing like that [1].
The problem this time is that Pipeline#clear() does not clear the DBWorkflow's "index" thing, the objects dictionary (because db_delete_module() doesn't), so objects stay in there. I lost most of today tracking that down while working the interpreter...
[1]: The piece of code for deleting a module loops until it finds it!
Yes, the db code would benefit from revision. The original goal was to provide serialization to XML and RDBMS (and potentially other formats). In order to preserve legacy access, various indexes were added but order was also mattered for some features where only that was used and ids didn't originally exist. Basically, we wanted to add the db code without changing the logic at the core level. This, and my beginning Python knowledge at the time, caused code like the ugly list/dictionary code above.
I have no idea why any of this is there of how it work. It seems to me that the DB layer was meant to be an easy-to-use, efficient object storage, but it is nothing like that [1].
The problem this time is that Pipeline#clear() does not clear the DBWorkflow's "index" thing, the
objects
dictionary (becausedb_delete_module()
doesn't), so objects stay in there. I lost most of today tracking that down while working the interpreter...[1]: The piece of code for deleting a module loops until it finds it!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: