alex23 wrote: > So what part of the standard library do you recommend using instead? > Or was there no time for advice between snarkiness?
As a matter of technique, I believe in fitting the storage to the particulars of the problem at hand. In my own projects, I will often employ simple text based formats (unix-rc, ini, or xml) whenever possible, and then roll the application specifics to suit it -- for any data that I expect that gaining good compression rates on later, will be favourable. Personally from what I've read in this thread, I would suggest using sqlite3 or an xml parser, depending on exactly what the OP wants. SQLite3 is fairly stable for routine use, and assuming that the OP has half a clue of figuring it out, would probably suit'em perfectly with much less bother then the standard xml brews. Over the years I have seen virtually everything tried for storing information, down to writing dictionaries out to a file for later slupin' & eval() recovery, which is a method that I have occasionally thrown my hands up at.... I don't even want to mention some of the commercial products I've bumped into! -- TerryP. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
