"py" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Well the other thing is that I am allowed to store strings in this > dictionary...so I can't just store the Engine and Body object and later > use them. ....this is just a requirement (which i dont understand > either)...but its what I have to do.
Probably so that the object store can later be moved offline, with the shelve module or DB API or something like that. > So my question is there a good way of storing this information in a > nested dictionary such that if I receive this dictionary I could easily > pull it apart and create Engine and Body objects with the information? > Any suggestions at all? keep in mind I am limited to using a > dictionary of strings...thats it. The spirit of the thing would be serialize the objects, maybe with cPickle, as Steven suggests. A kludgy way to thwart the policy might be to store the objects in a list instead of a dictionary: x[0], x[1], etc. Then have a dictionary mapping keys to subscripts in the list. The subscripts would be stringified ints: '0','1',... . -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
